Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FSF Certifies Another New But Old Re-Branded Opteron Board For Its Freedom

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    While I get that this is a small outfit and they need high margins, these prices are insane. I mean, basically EOL hardware with a 100% markup.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
      IBM didn't implement a fully separate CPU running a fully proprietary OS to run at higher privilege than the main CPU and OS, so there is that.
      So what you're saying is that because a CPU does not implement a separate software solution is is per default secure?

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by jacob View Post

        Aren't the POWER9 CPUs entirely owner-controlled and open to audit down to the microcode?
        Doesn't make them more secure. Maybe less exploitable in the generic mass target audience mass.

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by milkylainen View Post

          So what you're saying is that because a CPU does not implement a separate software solution is is per default secure?
          It's not a separate software solution, it's a separate hardware solution. And yes, any hardware isn't supervised by an independent hardware based invisible "hypercontroller" is more secure than one that has. Less attack vector space means less attack vector space. Just like a building having more doors is less secure than one having less doors, by default, ceteris paribus.

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by AndyChow View Post
            While I get that this is a small outfit and they need high margins, these prices are insane. I mean, basically EOL hardware with a 100% markup.
            What's the price of a certified libreboot motherboard with chip and ram included? You are paying for parts plus labor. Plus you are paying for it to be done in Germany, which is going to cost you more than doing the same work in China. A price of 375 Euros must include some profit, but it's not that outrageous. An 8 core Opteron will still be able to handle most modern workloads.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by milkylainen View Post
              So what you're saying is that because a CPU does not implement a separate software solution is is per default secure?
              so what you are saying is that because a CPU does not implement a hardware backdoor with full ethernet and sometimes wifi access (if it's using Intel Wifi) it's EXACTLY as safe as the ones that do?

              Doesn't make them more secure. Maybe less exploitable in the generic mass target audience mass.
              Sorry what? WHAT?

              PSP and ME are fucking hardware backdoors built into the system, and you are saying that systems that lack such HARDWARE backdoors with network access and DMA and higher-than-CPU privileges on anything in the system is "not more secure" than a system that lacks them?

              What kind of bullshit logic allows you to reach this conclusion?

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
                PSP and ME are fucking hardware backdoors built into the system, and you are saying that systems that lack such HARDWARE backdoors with network access and DMA and higher-than-CPU privileges on anything in the system is "not more secure" than a system that lacks them?

                What kind of bullshit logic allows you to reach this conclusion?
                LOL. Do you have access to those hardware backdoors? Does any regular blackhat have that kind of access? Good for gov't mass surveillance, pretty worthless for your run-of-the-mill cracker as far as I can tell. I guess whoever is running the current iteration of the Silk Road should be worried about this, or guys who are into international arms sales.

                You aren't wrong, but let's be honest. If the NSA wants your data, they have about 100 different ways of accessing it, and this is just one of them. So yeah, you could make an argument that the FUNCTIONAL security isn't terribly different between systems.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by AndyChow View Post

                  It's not a separate software solution, it's a separate hardware solution. And yes, any hardware isn't supervised by an independent hardware based invisible "hypercontroller" is more secure than one that has. Less attack vector space means less attack vector space. Just like a building having more doors is less secure than one having less doors, by default, ceteris paribus.
                  Well yes. That's what I said? Not secure. Perhaps less exploitable. As you said. Functional security is still in the same ballpark.
                  There is literally tons of attack vectors on any given system.
                  Public really has no clue as to what is built into their hardware, controlling processors or not.
                  Putting emphasis on this as a major selling point for security seems like market craptastics to me. It does not make a system secure.
                  IBM never made such a statement about their CPUs. It's just Raptor that claims that about their system solution.

                  I would never put something like a hardware backdoor into something that can be publicly scrutinized in software stacks that need upgrades (firmware/"hypercontrollers").

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X