Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 59

Thread: A Backdoor In AMD's Catalyst OpenCL Library?

  1. #11

    Default

    AMD PR already contacted me to let me know they're working on an answer.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    184

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    AMD PR already contacted me to let me know they're working on an answer.
    PRs are alway good for a big LOL

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    911

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    AMD PR already contacted me to let me know they're working on an answer.
    I hoped they were working on a solution instead of an answer: migrating all linux fglrx developers to radeon..
    ## VGA ##
    AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
    Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    127.0.0.1
    Posts
    112

    Default Stallman was right

    What if they have backdoors in the Firmware too? We need open devices, it's sad to see http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...tem&px=MTQ4MDU failed

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    305

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackStar View Post
    Can someone please verify the existence of this string?

    Not only does this make the Catalyst driver suspect, it also casts a shadow over the open-source driver. If you remember, AMD pushed *hard* to use a firmware blob in Radeon, instead of the clean-room approach of RadeonHD.

    I used to think it didn't matter, but apparently I was naive. Luc Verhaegen was right all along.
    I can confirm the existence:
    Code:
    $ nm /usr/lib/libamdocl64.so | grep -i backdoor
    000000000074dcf0 t osTestBackdoorATI
    Yet, who would lable a symbol for some backdoor "backdor"? This makes it to my list of the dumbest accusations I heard so far

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    911

    Default

    It's harder to put backdoors in the firmware and easier to spot compared to a whole driver. FOSS hardware it the next step of course but in the meantime I'm fine with FOSS drivers
    ## VGA ##
    AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
    Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    126

    Default

    Probably a dumb name for some debug function.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    135

    Default

    Put my bet down for 'not actually a backdoor; humorously-named test function'.

    If you were going to put a top-secret NSA backdoor into your driver, why would you give it such an obvious name? You'd call it osDefinitelyNotABackdoor instead, right?!

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    156

    Default

    Just more Nvidia FUD.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    457

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kemosabe View Post
    Let me summarize:
    AMD does make cpu's and desktop motherboard chipsets. ATI was acquired by AMD. I own a NVidia graphics card and that uses the proprietary Nvidia drivers.

    I was considering moving away from Intel due to their allegiance to Microsoft.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •