AMD, Intel and Qualcomm will integrate Microsoft Pluton security chip in CPUs
Click here to post a comment for AMD, Intel and Qualcomm will integrate Microsoft Pluton security chip in CPUs on our message forum
coth
MS is now making VPN chips for CIA, NSA, DARPA and DNC?
Fox2232
"... and signals the beginning of a journey..."
at least something positive may come from it:
"... and provide the ability to recover from software bugs."
"None of this information can be removed from Pluton..."
But what if attacker emulates legitimate method used to ask Pluton for those data?
"Pluton is keeping the system firmware up to date across the entire PC ecosystem."
"... updateable platform for running firmware that implements end-to-end security functionality authored, maintained, and updated by Microsoft."
fantaskarsef
Easy kill switch for the US government. Even more reason for other "players" to get their own CPU designs, like the Chinese and the EU try to do (EU is behind 20 years of course).
jose2016
That smells bad.
Let the risc-v arrive everywhere.
k3vst3r
Is under the assumption that MS themselves can't succumb to hacks.
anticupidon
If Microsoft says so, we have to believe them. Some folks at Defcons will laugh their beards off, but whatever...
How about PCs NOT running Windows? This sounds a bit iffy for those running anything but Windows. More proprietary code added to some kernels or OSs which MIcrosoft love so much, ain't so?
Sounds god, but I translate it to :On Mac devices, Big Sur takes all the control from the SMC and T1 security chips, one failed update bricks the firmware, leaving the device useful as paperweight. And everyone rushes to copy Apple.
So, until now, Microsoft did something good. All updates never touched the BIOS / UEFI and nothing motherboard related firmware. Now, that's about to change and sounds good, in reality this is troublesome. If anything, Windows Update team is prone to release updates who causes lots and lots of issues. But at least you can boot the computer, pull off the data from your storage and reinstall...But now, future looks grim.
My 2 cents on this sordid affair.
anticupidon
Will buy as much hardware as I can afford NOW, before they taint even more the hardware.
As buying older CPUs , without IME or PSP.
Turanis
"The role of the Windows PC and trust in technology" its like trusting in their last Windows 10 patches.
More blackholes in MS patches than entire Universe. :evilmaster:
schmidtbag
Out of curiosity but what version of Windows was more secure, and why? I'm not saying W10 is secure but most other versions were so easy to exploit that people could make a living off of fixing such vulnerabilities. That's not so much the case anymore.
Oh don't worry, MS will surely commit some patches to the Linux kernel. They've been contributing a lot lately (a little too much IMO). It's just going to be a mater of whether Torvalds accepts it.
Good point about the SMC and T1 chips, though I would say this isn't the first time MS meddled with UEFIs. Take SecureBoot for example. Though, obviously that's nowhere near as problematic.
Nicked_Wicked
I really don’t like this development, more backdoors to be installed. (as if we didn’t have enough already)
Kevin Mauro
Hmm guess the future is ARM & Linux. Thank goodness a gaming company bought ARM.
Exodite
Surely they mean introduce entire vectors of attack?
I read this list of items and all I can see is additional security concerns. Keyloggers, stealing biometric data and storing it god knows where. Introducing black-box hardware, firmware and software layers with direct low-level access to kernel space. All in the name of "security".
The problem, and it's most definitely not unique to Microsoft, is that the vendors keep making the same capital mistake - believing that they can be trusted.
One would have thought that the abundance of hardware security issues we've seen over the last few years would have cured them of that particular notion but it seems not.
Just bring more games to *nix please, I'm ready.
Kevin Mauro
Will have a hard time without a client-side off switch; otherwise, why would a Microsoft competitor buy this and not sue in the event it was breached as opposed to without where the listed responsibilities are dependent on the consumer or enterprise customer. I think the argument for creating an alternative is strong for Windows dependent enterprise users that would have to pay out millions upon millions of dollars to avoid this upgrade solution. Also - is it GDRP compliant?
anticupidon
GDRP compliant?
No.
When Microsoft will accomplish what they want, it will be too late.
Bullying their way in the Linux foundation and add code who benefits everyone, but mostly them.
Now then, planting their own security chip into the hardware ....
When everything will be in place, you can kiss your freedom and privacy goodbye forever.
There will be no turning back. Once a right or a freedom is removed, no amount of public uproar, no fine or anything will grant it back.
People will comply because "it is for their benefit and security".
What about keep your hands out if this Microsoft. Get your updates straight and offer a more privacy respecting OS.
Oh, wait, I can have that by running Gnu/Linux or BSD.
Microsoft knows that a few years later they will become irrelevant in OS space, so they take control of the hardware to win by stabbing in the back everyone running whatever OS on x86 platform.
itpro
" Spyware/keylogger/Trojan horse etc built inside. "
Enjoy! 😎
theoneofgod
We prefer our CPU's like swiss cheese.
anticupidon
Dream on. It will be built-in. In the actual silicon. Good luck disabling that.
As in the IME until now so many worked to disable ME region from the SPI and they had a few successes but mostly failures.
How about disabling something built to control everything?
