>>1449282

Eh, while I won't disagree that it should be added to the notables, I disagree with the association and conclusion. Let anons make up their own minds, but I think it is faces in the clouds.

AMD makes a wide range of devices and if you are buying a computer, you have a choice of Intel, AMD, or ARM. I suppose you could try to dig up an old Cyrix, or something - but if it's what we understand as a "computer," your only options are AMD or Intel. If we are talking 'things kind of like a computer' ARM gets included. Then you get into your larger system builders, like Foxconn, Qualcom, IBM, etc.

I'm just not seeing the connection.

>>1449467

The management engine is -supposed- to only be installed on certain company systems….. but, well, I turned by bluetooth off by tapping a button on my screen and watching the icon change, too.

Why any company would consider this type of thing a valuable feature, I have absolutely no idea. There again, companies buy machines with hardware lock-outs on their programming. Pivatic or Salvagnini could check a box in their systems, at some point, flagging a software lockout and whoever that machine is associated to has a giant heap of scrap. Or… you know… God Forbid the internet ever goes down and the thing can't radio home to check and see if it is allowed to run a part.

The people in charge of business decisions, today… I swear….

>>1449516

>>CTS Labs, a Tel Aviv-based hardware security company announced the vulnerabilities on a sleek ad hoc website and in videos published Tuesday. The company also published a white paper that explains what the vulnerabilities are without including their full technical details.

Among the most explosive claims in the white paper is the idea that there are “an array of hidden manufacturer backdoors inside AMD's Promontory chipsets” and “the Ryzen and Ryzen Pro chipsets, currently shipping with exploitable backdoors, could not have passed even the most rudimentary white-box security review.”

Reads like a tabloid smear piece, frankly. Note the origin.

I'll admit to being rather pro-AMD biased, but I don't really see a reason to take the claims of this group very seriously. Intel suffered a lot of damage with the release of information on Meltdown and the requirement to force un-maps of the memory manager when exiting kernel mode in virtual environments.

Someone is trying to return the favor on AMD, but doesn't actually have any substance to their claim.