Australian Politics Forum - Intel CPUs have backdoors

Bobby.

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 104609
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Intel CPUs have backdoors
Reply #15 - Oct 24^th, 2024 at 8:53pm

Setanta wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 8:42pm:

Software in the sense of what operating system you run or what programs you run on it are not the issue. It's the hardware code and what Microcode provides.

That's correct but we are talking about an unknown instruction set -

well - known only to the CPU designers and the NSA and their co-conspirators.

Back to top

IP Logged

Aurora Complexus

Senior Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 399
New South Whales
Gender: male

Re: Intel CPUs have backdoors
Reply #16 - Oct 24^th, 2024 at 8:54pm

Setanta wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 8:42pm:

Bobby. wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 8:33pm:

Aurora Complexus wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 8:26pm:

"The US government bought a backdoor" is something I can believe. Nobody else could afford it.

But it's a basic of spycraft, that a backdoor exposed is a backdoor lost. Until it is common knowledge and there are work arounds (aka protections) the US government isn't giving the backdoor to Australian government.

Also, don't hackers find these things within days or weeks? Don't the half dozen anti-virus brands, provide protections (for fear of their competitors.)? And there's always linux, as you mentioned. Do you think Microsoft are going to expose their customers to a backdoor, which Apple or Linux protect against?

And I say again, why would Intel risk their market to AMD? Are we looking at the jewel of all conspiracy theories: "they're ALL in on it"?

My bet is that all those companies are forced to put in back doors on their products.
Intel,
Microsoft,
Apple,

but Linux is different.
The order is also made secret so that they can't talk about it.

There is a rumor on the internet that ever since Win95 back in 1995
Bill Gates was forced to hand over - against his will -
the source code of all Windows operating systems to the NSA -
and that goes right through till now with Win11.

It wouldn't surprise me if the Chinese forced Huawei to do the same.

Software in the sense of what operating system you run or what programs you run on it are not the issue. It's the hardware code and what Microcode provides.

64 bits is a scary number to humans: about 1.8×10^19 different possible instructions.

But I can guarantee that someone has tried all 2^64 possibilities, to see if the CPU does something other than "error."

Big numbers don't bother a computer, and they don't bother a serious computer hacker either.

Back to top

IP Logged

Bobby.

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 104609
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Intel CPUs have backdoors
Reply #17 - Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:05pm

Aurora Complexus wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 8:54pm:

64 bits is a scary number to humans: about 1.8×10^19 different possible instructions.

But I can guarantee that someone has tried all 2^64 possibilities, to see if the CPU does something other than "error."

Big numbers don't bother a computer, and they don't bother a serious computer hacker either.

We're getting a bit technical now.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_instruction_set_architectures

I'm sure companies like Norton security could develop software to detect
unknown instructions in scripts etc.

The question is - are they in on it too?

Are our computers part of a complete security farce?

Back to top

IP Logged

Aurora Complexus

Senior Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 399
New South Whales
Gender: male

Re: Intel CPUs have backdoors
Reply #18 - Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:08pm

Bobby. wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 8:53pm:

Setanta wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 8:42pm:

Software in the sense of what operating system you run or what programs you run on it are not the issue. It's the hardware code and what Microcode provides.

That's correct but we are talking about an unknown instruction set -

well - known only to the CPU designers and the NSA and their co-conspirators.

I suppose it's possible that the instruction set could be 128 bits wide. But if so, it would slow the processor down to have to read 128 bits for every instruction (and bear in mind that instructions are sometimes passed from one part of the processor to the other.) Even assuming the other hardware passed such an instruction, the obvious action would be to cull the top 64 bits.

But even assuming that 128 bit instructions somehow get to the processor (by a corrupted compiler) and are somehow processed to a cause a "hidden instruction" to be executed, this is still something that a hacker could detect.

They basically just have to do <crazy instruction> <input> and see if they get something other than "illegal instruction" back. Do it over and over (perhaps while they take a much needed nap.) They do that 2^32 times, or even 2^64 times, for every possible instruction.

Well maybe the "hidden instruction" requires a specific string or else it returns "illegal instruction." But remember that there is more than one hacker. A hacker may be curious enough to record the timing of every "illegal instruction" which comes back. Then they have one suspect instruction number, and can start peppering it with random strings to try to guess the "password" of that instruction. Imagine the fame they could gain, not just finding a hidden instruction but finding its password.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:16pm by Aurora Complexus »

IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 58468
Here
Gender: male

Re: Intel CPUs have backdoors
Reply #19 - Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:14pm

Even the Australian Government have access to a lot of Microsoft stuff including source code and in some cases cryptographic code. Our government may have the keys to your computer.

This is from a government release in 2002. This is what the Australian government were admitting over 20 years ago.

Quote:

Government Security Program: Fact Sheet

Overview The Government Security Program (GSP) is one important facet of Microsoft’s efforts
to help address the unique security requirements of governments around the world. The GSP
provides national governments access to Windows® source code and information they need to be
confident in the security of the Microsoft® Windows platform. This program embodies the
principles of Microsoft’s Trustworthy Computing and Shared Source initiatives, and is built upon
the cornerstones of transparency and partnership.
Benefits Participation in the GSP affords national governments the following benefits:
• Online access to source code for the most current versions, beta releases and service
packs of Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Server 2003 and Windows CE.Net;
• Engineering-level understanding of Windows architecture through expansive disclosure
of Microsoft technical information;
• Enhanced ability to conduct security and privacy audits and to design, build and maintain
demonstrably secure computing environments;
• Access to cryptographic code and development tools, subject to U.S. export regulations;
• Source code training;
• Communication and collaboration with Microsoft security professionals; and
• Opportunities for visits by agency representatives to Microsoft development facilities in
Redmond, Washington.

https://www.aph.gov.au/parliamentary_business/committees/house_of_representative...

Back to top

IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 58468
Here
Gender: male

Re: Intel CPUs have backdoors
Reply #20 - Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:17pm

Bobby. wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:05pm:

Aurora Complexus wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 8:54pm:

64 bits is a scary number to humans: about 1.8×10^19 different possible instructions.

But I can guarantee that someone has tried all 2^64 possibilities, to see if the CPU does something other than "error."

Big numbers don't bother a computer, and they don't bother a serious computer hacker either.

We're getting a bit technical now.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_instruction_set_architectures

I'm sure companies like Norton security could develop software to detect
unknown instructions in scripts etc.

The question is - are they in on it too?

Are our computers part of a complete security farce?

Quote:

The question is - are they in on it too?

They are part of it. They are legally prevented from doing anything. It would be a national security crime.

Back to top

IP Logged

Bobby.

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 104609
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Intel CPUs have backdoors
Reply #21 - Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:18pm

Aurora Complexus wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:08pm:

Bobby. wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 8:53pm:

Setanta wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 8:42pm:

Software in the sense of what operating system you run or what programs you run on it are not the issue. It's the hardware code and what Microcode provides.

That's correct but we are talking about an unknown instruction set -

well - known only to the CPU designers and the NSA and their co-conspirators.

I suppose it's possible that the instruction set could be 128 bits wide. But if so, it would slow the processor down to have to read 128 bits for every instruction (and bear in mind that instructions are sometimes passed from one part of the processor to the other.) Even assuming the other hardware passed such an instruction, the obvious action would be to cull the top 64 bits.

But even assuming that 128 bit instructions somehow get to the processor (by a corrupted compiler) and are somehow processed to a cause a "hidden instruction" to be executed, this is still something that a hacker could detect.

They basically just have to do <crazy instruction> <input> and see if they get something other than "illegal instruction" back. Do it over and over (perhaps while they take a much needed nap.) They do that 2^32 times, or even 2^64 times, for every possible instruction.

Well maybe the "hidden instruction" requires a specific string or else it returns "illegal instruction." But remember that there is more than one hacker. A hacker may be curious enough to record the timing of every "illegal instruction" which comes back. Then they have one suspect instruction number, and can start peppering it with random strings to try to guess the "password" of that instruction. Imagine the fame they could gain, not just finding a hidden instruction but finding its password.

Sep 1, 2017

A processor is not a trusted black box for running code; on the contrary, modern x86 chips are
packed full of secret instructions and hardware bugs.
In this talk, we'll demonstrate how page fault analysis and
some creative processor fuzzing can be used to exhaustively search the
x86 instruction set and uncover the secrets buried in your chipset.

Back to top

IP Logged

Bobby.

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 104609
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Intel CPUs have backdoors
Reply #22 - Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:19pm

Dnarever wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:17pm:

Bobby. wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:05pm:

Aurora Complexus wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 8:54pm:

64 bits is a scary number to humans: about 1.8×10^19 different possible instructions.

But I can guarantee that someone has tried all 2^64 possibilities, to see if the CPU does something other than "error."

Big numbers don't bother a computer, and they don't bother a serious computer hacker either.

We're getting a bit technical now.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_instruction_set_architectures

I'm sure companies like Norton security could develop software to detect
unknown instructions in scripts etc.

The question is - are they in on it too?

Are our computers part of a complete security farce?

Quote:

The question is - are they in on it too?

They are part of it. They are legally prevented from doing anything. It would be a national security crime.

You're right - it's all top secret.
It shows the power of Govts.

Back to top

IP Logged

Dnarever Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 58468 Here Gender:	Re: Intel CPUs have backdoors Reply #23 - Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:23pm I wont say the product but there was a time when Australia were introducing a new major telecommunications system. The Australian company involved were delayed in approval to release the new product because the government were not yet able to break into the systems encryption.
Back to top	IP Logged

Aurora Complexus

Senior Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 399
New South Whales
Gender: male

Re: Intel CPUs have backdoors
Reply #24 - Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:28pm

Dnarever wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:14pm:

Even the Australian Government have access to a lot of Microsoft stuff including source code and in some cases cryptographic code. Our government may have the keys to your computer.

This is from a government release in 2002. This is what the Australian government were admitting over 20 years ago.

Quote:

Government Security Program: Fact Sheet

Overview The Government Security Program (GSP) is one important facet of Microsoft’s efforts
to help address the unique security requirements of governments around the world. The GSP
provides national governments access to Windows® source code and information they need to be
confident in the security of the Microsoft® Windows platform. This program embodies the
principles of Microsoft’s Trustworthy Computing and Shared Source initiatives, and is built upon
the cornerstones of transparency and partnership.
Benefits Participation in the GSP affords national governments the following benefits:
• Online access to source code for the most current versions, beta releases and service
packs of Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Server 2003 and Windows CE.Net;
• Engineering-level understanding of Windows architecture through expansive disclosure
of Microsoft technical information;
• Enhanced ability to conduct security and privacy audits and to design, build and maintain
demonstrably secure computing environments;
• Access to cryptographic code and development tools, subject to U.S. export regulations;
• Source code training;
• Communication and collaboration with Microsoft security professionals; and
• Opportunities for visits by agency representatives to Microsoft development facilities in
Redmond, Washington.

https://www.aph.gov.au/parliamentary_business/committees/house_of_representative...

Well I've been hacked by the Australian Government (or even more pathetically, by the NSW Government.) It was pretty bad for a while, I think they were setting their trainees on me and they BROKE STUFF. I had to re-install Windows at least twice, and Linux more times than I can count.

Perhaps relevantly, I did a bit of harmless hacking when I was a University student. I had talent, so I was a "person of interest" even after I dropped Computer Science after a year. The most talented of my cohorts were poached by IBM and the government.

So why didn't I become a full blood computer hacker? Well I'm not really that smart with systems someone else designed. Too much rote learning. I'm a more creative type, and specifically to computer hacking: government passed laws against that.

Anyway. Every time I ran Linux I got rooted very quickly. Open source is still the best way, but it does expose you to hackers.

Back to top

IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 58468
Here
Gender: male

Re: Intel CPUs have backdoors
Reply #25 - Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:33pm

Aurora Complexus wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:08pm:

Bobby. wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 8:53pm:

Setanta wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 8:42pm:

Software in the sense of what operating system you run or what programs you run on it are not the issue. It's the hardware code and what Microcode provides.

That's correct but we are talking about an unknown instruction set -

well - known only to the CPU designers and the NSA and their co-conspirators.

I suppose it's possible that the instruction set could be 128 bits wide. But if so, it would slow the processor down to have to read 128 bits for every instruction (and bear in mind that instructions are sometimes passed from one part of the processor to the other.) Even assuming the other hardware passed such an instruction, the obvious action would be to cull the top 64 bits.

But even assuming that 128 bit instructions somehow get to the processor (by a corrupted compiler) and are somehow processed to a cause a "hidden instruction" to be executed, this is still something that a hacker could detect.

They basically just have to do <crazy instruction> <input> and see if they get something other than "illegal instruction" back. Do it over and over (perhaps while they take a much needed nap.) They do that 2^32 times, or even 2^64 times, for every possible instruction.

Well maybe the "hidden instruction" requires a specific string or else it returns "illegal instruction." But remember that there is more than one hacker. A hacker may be curious enough to record the timing of every "illegal instruction" which comes back. Then they have one suspect instruction number, and can start peppering it with random strings to try to guess the "password" of that instruction. Imagine the fame they could gain, not just finding a hidden instruction but finding its password.

Quote:

I suppose it's possible that the instruction set could be 128 bits wide

32 bit processing was limited to 4 G of access space. This was a restrictive limit.

64 bit processing allows what to us is unlimited addressing space.

Going to 128 bit is technically difficult - i.e. not all 64 bit processors work correctly. there have been a lot of failed processors developed. but the main reason is that to do this would be fixing a problem that does not currently exist. It would be a huge expense for something that is just not needed.

32-bit - 4,294,967,295 This is where the 4 G limit comes from.

64-bit - 18,446,744,073,709,551,615 This is the number we currently use

128-bit - 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,768,211,455 We don't need this yet and it would cost many $ Billions possibly $ Trillions.

Each step is exponential.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:48pm by Dnarever »

IP Logged

Aurora Complexus

Senior Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 399
New South Whales
Gender: male

Re: Intel CPUs have backdoors
Reply #26 - Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:36pm

Bobby. wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:18pm:

Aurora Complexus wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:08pm:

Bobby. wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 8:53pm:

Setanta wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 8:42pm:

Software in the sense of what operating system you run or what programs you run on it are not the issue. It's the hardware code and what Microcode provides.

That's correct but we are talking about an unknown instruction set -

well - known only to the CPU designers and the NSA and their co-conspirators.

I suppose it's possible that the instruction set could be 128 bits wide. But if so, it would slow the processor down to have to read 128 bits for every instruction (and bear in mind that instructions are sometimes passed from one part of the processor to the other.) Even assuming the other hardware passed such an instruction, the obvious action would be to cull the top 64 bits.

But even assuming that 128 bit instructions somehow get to the processor (by a corrupted compiler) and are somehow processed to a cause a "hidden instruction" to be executed, this is still something that a hacker could detect.

They basically just have to do <crazy instruction> <input> and see if they get something other than "illegal instruction" back. Do it over and over (perhaps while they take a much needed nap.) They do that 2^32 times, or even 2^64 times, for every possible instruction.

Well maybe the "hidden instruction" requires a specific string or else it returns "illegal instruction." But remember that there is more than one hacker. A hacker may be curious enough to record the timing of every "illegal instruction" which comes back. Then they have one suspect instruction number, and can start peppering it with random strings to try to guess the "password" of that instruction. Imagine the fame they could gain, not just finding a hidden instruction but finding its password.

Sep 1, 2017

A processor is not a trusted black box for running code; on the contrary, modern x86 chips are
packed full of secret instructions and hardware bugs.

So if there are secret instructions, what are their numbers?

To make a processor execute an instruction, you need to give the processor a number.

Now the most obvious reason that neither you or anyone else can give the number of a secret instruction ... is that it's not really secret.

Back to top

IP Logged

Bobby.

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 104609
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Intel CPUs have backdoors
Reply #27 - Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:38pm

Aurora Complexus wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:36pm:

So if there are secret instructions, what are their numbers?

To make a processor execute an instruction, you need to give the processor a number.

Now the most obvious reason that neither you or anyone else can give the number of a secret instruction ... is that it's not really secret.

The video might tell you.

again.

Back to top

IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 58468
Here
Gender: male

Re: Intel CPUs have backdoors
Reply #28 - Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:46pm

Aurora Complexus wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:28pm:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:14pm:

Even the Australian Government have access to a lot of Microsoft stuff including source code and in some cases cryptographic code. Our government may have the keys to your computer.

This is from a government release in 2002. This is what the Australian government were admitting over 20 years ago.

Quote:

Government Security Program: Fact Sheet

Overview The Government Security Program (GSP) is one important facet of Microsoft’s efforts
to help address the unique security requirements of governments around the world. The GSP
provides national governments access to Windows® source code and information they need to be
confident in the security of the Microsoft® Windows platform. This program embodies the
principles of Microsoft’s Trustworthy Computing and Shared Source initiatives, and is built upon
the cornerstones of transparency and partnership.
Benefits Participation in the GSP affords national governments the following benefits:
• Online access to source code for the most current versions, beta releases and service
packs of Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Server 2003 and Windows CE.Net;
• Engineering-level understanding of Windows architecture through expansive disclosure
of Microsoft technical information;
• Enhanced ability to conduct security and privacy audits and to design, build and maintain
demonstrably secure computing environments;
• Access to cryptographic code and development tools, subject to U.S. export regulations;
• Source code training;
• Communication and collaboration with Microsoft security professionals; and
• Opportunities for visits by agency representatives to Microsoft development facilities in
Redmond, Washington.

https://www.aph.gov.au/parliamentary_business/committees/house_of_representative...

Well I've been hacked by the Australian Government (or even more pathetically, by the NSW Government.) It was pretty bad for a while, I think they were setting their trainees on me and they BROKE STUFF. I had to re-install Windows at least twice, and Linux more times than I can count.

Perhaps relevantly, I did a bit of harmless hacking when I was a University student. I had talent, so I was a "person of interest" even after I dropped Computer Science after a year. The most talented of my cohorts were poached by IBM and the government.

So why didn't I become a full blood computer hacker? Well I'm not really that smart with systems someone else designed. Too much rote learning. I'm a more creative type, and specifically to computer hacking: government passed laws against that.

Anyway. Every time I ran Linux I got rooted very quickly. Open source is still the best way, but it does expose you to hackers.

Did some IT security courses with a couple of police hackers (not what they called themself) real scary smart guys.

Was never into Hacking the closest I got was with some corporate PEN testing and internal access and or recovery to access broken computers and servers.

Back to top

IP Logged

Aurora Complexus

Senior Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 399
New South Whales
Gender: male

Re: Intel CPUs have backdoors
Reply #29 - Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:47pm

Dnarever wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:33pm:

Aurora Complexus wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 9:08pm:

Bobby. wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 8:53pm:

Setanta wrote on Oct 24^th, 2024 at 8:42pm:

Software in the sense of what operating system you run or what programs you run on it are not the issue. It's the hardware code and what Microcode provides.

That's correct but we are talking about an unknown instruction set -

well - known only to the CPU designers and the NSA and their co-conspirators.

I suppose it's possible that the instruction set could be 128 bits wide. But if so, it would slow the processor down to have to read 128 bits for every instruction (and bear in mind that instructions are sometimes passed from one part of the processor to the other.) Even assuming the other hardware passed such an instruction, the obvious action would be to cull the top 64 bits.

But even assuming that 128 bit instructions somehow get to the processor (by a corrupted compiler) and are somehow processed to a cause a "hidden instruction" to be executed, this is still something that a hacker could detect.

They basically just have to do <crazy instruction> <input> and see if they get something other than "illegal instruction" back. Do it over and over (perhaps while they take a much needed nap.) They do that 2^32 times, or even 2^64 times, for every possible instruction.

Well maybe the "hidden instruction" requires a specific string or else it returns "illegal instruction." But remember that there is more than one hacker. A hacker may be curious enough to record the timing of every "illegal instruction" which comes back. Then they have one suspect instruction number, and can start peppering it with random strings to try to guess the "password" of that instruction. Imagine the fame they could gain, not just finding a hidden instruction but finding its password.

Quote:

I suppose it's possible that the instruction set could be 128 bits wide

32 bit processing was limited to 4 G of access space. This was a restrictive limit.

64 bit processing allows what to us is unlimited addressing space.

Effectively unlimited, for now. "Over 18 quintillion" which certainly covers the hard disk capacity of your home network and your work network. But actually it's a bit limiting when considering the internet. IP-v6 has an address space of 128 bits. [/quote]

Quote:

Going to 128 bit is technically difficult - i.e. not all 64 bit processors work correctly. there have been a lot of failed processors developed. but the main reason is that to do this would be fixing a problem that does not currently exist. It would be a huge expense for something that is just not needed.

32-bit - 4,294,967,295 This is where the 4 G limit comes from.

64-bit - 18,446,744,073,709,551,615 This is the number we currently use

128-bit - 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,768,211,455 We don't need this

It's a sensible upgrade for internet addresses. 64 bit isn't actually necessary yet, but the new domains are largely IP-v6, and if I was founding a website I would make sure it is registered in v4 AND v6.

Wasn't it a bummer for you, when hard disks got stuck at 4G? You could pay more for a faster disk, when all you wanted was a bigger disk.

Maybe it's a bloke thing. Bigger is always better than faster, when it comes to hard disks.

Back to top

IP Logged