Supermicro along with Apple and Amazon refute claims in Bloomberg story
Super Micro Computer, Inc. (SMCI), a global leader in enterprise computing, storage, networking solutions and green computing technology, strongly refutes reports that servers it sold to customers contained malicious microchips in the motherboards of those systems.
In an article today, it is alleged that Supermicro motherboards sold to certain customers contained malicious chips on its motherboards in 2015. Supermicro has never found any malicious chips, nor been informed by any customer that such chips have been found.
Each company mentioned in the article (Supermicro,
Supermicro has never been contacted by any government agencies either domestic or foreign regarding the alleged claims.
Supermicro takes all security claims very seriously and makes continuous investments in the security capabilities of their products. The manufacture of motherboards in
SuperMicro to release two Supero X299 motherboards (updated) - 06/02/2017 05:03 PM
Supermicro presented its C7X299-PG at the IT trade show Computex in Taiwan. Much like all Intel board partners Supermicro is cooking up something nice as well. And I do say nice with a reason, as prev...
Review: SuperMicro C7Z270-CG Motherboard - 01/19/2017 10:51 AM
It is the era of the Z270 schipset, and in this article we cover the SuperMicro C7Z270-CG review. It is advertised as a server grade motherboard, but will it deliver in performance, features and aesth...
Review: SuperMicro C7Z170-SQ motherboard - 11/03/2015 10:08 AM
In this review we look at a SuperMicro C7Z170-SQ motherboard from their new Gaming series. SMC is predominantly active in the server market, however they have a new gaming line of consumer grade mainb...
SPARKLE CalibreCUTi Supermicro Computer - 01/19/2010 01:28 PM
Sparkle announced the Calibre CUTi, a revolutionary small form factor PC providing high definition 1080p playback and digital surround sound for a variety of multimedia formats displayed right on a us...
Senior Member
Posts: 15324
Joined: 2018-03-21
This is the danger. Taking one story like this and painting all of media with it. So, no he's isn't especially since what he's claiming is 'fake news' are factual articles about him. So lets be careful in how we describe things.
Back on topic.
This story smelled from the beginning to me simply from the lack of even one physical device being uncovered. Not a one.
not just the lack of evidence of it, i asked a pcb engineer and she said the particular placement of the chip would make it impossible to tell actual data from electronic noise.
Senior Member
Posts: 22421
Joined: 2008-07-14
actually, in cases like these, the chance of Bloomberg (or the traditional media) being "fake" with allegations like these is zero.
why zero? because every printed story naming names and companies have been triple verified to avoid libel.
Bloomberg is first and foremost a business media outlet.
the fact that we've heard from corporate public relations means nothing. if these allegations were false the lawyers would be talking, not P.R. hacks.
Amazon's response wasn't from a "PR hack".... It was from the Chief Information Security Officer at AWS...
Bloomberg claims that affected systems were sold to specific customers. The issue here is that the manufacturing plant in China would not know exactly what customers would get what boards, making it impossible to target specific companies. The manufacturing plant would also have to modify intended circuits and add a lot of new circuits to account for the functionality of these "smaller than a grain of rice" chips. When did China develop the technology to create such a small chip and all the traces necessary to pull off such a feat? The necessary traces alone would make the chip larger than a grain of rice.
Senior Member
Posts: 3244
Joined: 2017-08-18
Amazon's response wasn't from a "PR hack".... It was from the Chief Information Security Officer at AWS...
Bloomberg claims that affected systems were sold to specific customers. The issue here is that the manufacturing plant in China would not know exactly what customers would get what boards, making it impossible to target specific companies. The manufacturing plant would also have to modify intended circuits and add a lot of new circuits to account for the functionality of these "smaller than a grain of rice" chips. When did China develop the technology to create such a small chip and all the traces necessary to pull off such a feat? The necessary traces alone would make the chip larger than a grain of rice.
you are forgetting that this is a state actor.
SuperMicro may or may not know where the shipments are bound, but China can easily manipulate that with export controls.
also, passive sensor technology has been progressing by leaps and bounds. who knows what the State Labs in China (or here) produce?
the U.S., back when only the U.S. and Japan made computer components, had back-doors into just about every hdd and a lot of the early networks. some of which were hardware, not software. i know this for a fact as i worked for the premier manufacturer of optical drives and optical technology and we had to operate under certain controls...and these were ROM.
every early laptop was essentially "bugged" until Chinese manufacturing came online.
this is not paranoia, it's fact of record so i'm very cynical.
Senior Member
Posts: 14278
Joined: 2014-07-21
Apparently, neither was a concrete case given where this alleged placement of chips really happened, nor who gave the information away. Fake news coming from the pentagon?
https://translate.google.at/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=y&prev=-t&hl=de&ie=UTF-8&u=https%3A%2F%2Ffm4.orf.at%2Fstories%2F2940104%2F&edit-text=&act=url
Senior Member
Posts: 3244
Joined: 2017-08-18
Next time, "let's be careful" and stay on topic in the first place...
There's just no logic to back that up. If by "every printed story naming names", you mean the one Bloomberg story that we're talking about, the one that didn't name any names, and you just going on the authors word that everything is super verified and double fact checked with a blue star, then you just missed the point.
The strength of your opinion doesn't ~= fact.
WRONG
they named the companies, who are able to sue for false claims, market interference, and a chilling effect.
and i'm not going on ANYBODY's WORD.
you are obviously unacquainted with business at the corporate level. "Bloomberg" is not just highly regarded, It Has Professional Standards that lead its industry.
i stand by every word i posted.
until the lawyers for Amazon, SuperMicro, and Apple speak i stand with Bloomberg.
and obtw, it is simplicity itself (not counting the actual device) for the Chinese to plant bugs in specific batches of mobo's.
they're in China, with Chinese workers, working for a Chinese company that is beholden to its repressive government.
i've spent the first 10 years of my career riding herd on Dual Use electronics (because of Cold War export controls) and i can testify factually on the pervasive attempts to buy, steal, copy, or borrow technology by the Russians and Chinese. it never stops...ever.