News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Rediscovering the Intel AMT Vulnerability.

Re:Rediscovering the Intel AMT Vulnerability by DuskStar on Friday May 05, 2017 @01:07PM (#14274979)
So the AMT vuln was related to a lack of security on their web service? Somehow this does not increase my confidence in the rest of their code - if they didn't get this right, what else is wrong?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Rediscovering the Intel AMT Vulnerability by tyingq on Friday May 05, 2017 @02:41PM (#14275796)
The Intel note mentioned a local vulnerability that allowed local non root users to provision AMT as well. That sounds like at least one more, different, issue.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Rediscovering the Intel AMT Vulnerability by fhood on Friday May 05, 2017 @01:27PM (#14275165)
To be fair, it is pretty rare (impossible) to find "secure" software that has zero avoidable vulnerabilities.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Rediscovering the Intel AMT Vulnerability by Karunamon on Friday May 05, 2017 @01:39PM (#14275266)
That's more of an argument about inauditable, non-disableable, hostile (the CPU shuts itself off if you blank out the appropriate data structures) code running below ring 0
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Rediscovering the Intel AMT Vulnerability by throwaway2048 on Saturday May 06, 2017 @12:42AM (#14278708)
Don't forget in the majority of cases unupdatable too! (No vendor is going to issue fixes for old boards)
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Rediscovering the Intel AMT Vulnerability by FrozenVoid on Friday May 05, 2017 @01:31PM (#14275195)
see https://threatpost.com/researcher-baseless-assumptions-exist...
[ Parent | on HN ]