News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Intel Security True Key by micheljones on Sunday December 04, 2016 @05:36PM (#13102159)
ME does have ability to do that, tho.
Re:Intel Security True Key by comboy on Sunday December 04, 2016 @05:46PM (#13102188)
Do you think you could fit drivers for all common ethernet/wifi cards in there and proper TCP/IP implementation? It's below assembly abstraction level.
Re:Intel Security True Key by Sephr on Sunday December 04, 2016 @08:20PM (#13102761)
Intel ME has independent NIC access and usually cannot be disabled by the user.

It has only been six days since it has become possible to neutralize the ME firmware for Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge[1].

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13056997

Re:Intel Security True Key by moppl on Sunday December 04, 2016 @05:57PM (#13102224)
The ME is basically an independent universal computer in its own right, it comes with its own clock, RAM, CPU etc...

It is like a Matryoshka doll sitting inside the Intel CPU of your computer. Therefore, yes, it can contain all of that. For further details see my other two posts.

Re:Intel Security True Key by comboy on Sunday December 04, 2016 @06:35PM (#13102356)
Sorry I was just thinking about microcodes and you are talking about ME. Scary stuff indeed[1]

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Active_Management_Techno...

Re:Intel Security True Key by imtringued on Monday December 05, 2016 @02:08AM (#13103859)
How else would you implement remote server management that works even when the hardware is shut down (put still connected to power) if not with a seperate CPU that has access to the NIC?
Re:Intel Security True Key by akerl_ on Sunday December 04, 2016 @05:43PM (#13102178)
Just like IPMI, or any other standard for allowing hardware-level admin of a system.
Re:Intel Security True Key by micheljones on Monday December 05, 2016 @03:57AM (#13104208)
By using the word 'standard' you're trying to legitimize something that's fully encrypted, impossible to code-audit and fully under control of Intel, while pretending to be your property and controlled by you.

So yes, it's a standard. I believe there was also a standard on how to tie a noose for hanging a human, but that didn't mean much to the one getting hanged.