Intel hits back at China's accusations it bakes in NSA backdoors

Intel has responded to Chinese claims that its chips include security backdoors at the direction of America's NSA. The accusations were made earlier this week from industry group the Cybersecurity Association of China (CSAC) which alleged Chipzilla had embedded a backdoor "in almost all" of its CPUs since 2008 as part of a " …

[Pascal Monett]

What goes around comes around

You can't blacklist Huawei on grounds of Beijing snooping and expect China to not respond in kind.

I don't think Intel is backing backdoors in its products, but I am not surprised that China is using that line of attack.

[cyberdemon]

Re: I don't think Intel is [baking?] backdoors in[to] its products

https://www.techrepublic.com/article/is-the-intel-management-engine-a-backdoor/

Intel says it's not a backdoor. Huawei to doubt them?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: What goes around comes around

"I don't think Intel is backing backdoors in its products, but I am not surprised that China is using that line of attack."

I find it interesting that they raise backdoors (difficult to detect based on vulnerabilities we have seen in Intel products) AND quality.

Intel's quality issues over the last 8 or so years are well documented but there have also been China-specific products that have been lower cost than mainstream parts. If this is directed at mainstream parts, it just be like that - if it's the lower cost Chinese parts, get mainstream parts and quit complaining...

[IamAProton]

Typical

As if it's not S.C.O.P. (standard communist operating procedure) to "blame back" when you are accused (and guilty) of something; sometimes they might even be right, but if you do it every single time it gets old really fast.

Most likely it's internal-propaganda material for the state controlled media.

On a side note, I hope Intel used WeChat from a computer not connected to any sensitive network, ideally from a fastfood or coffeshop "across the street" ;-)

[IamAProton]

Re: Typical

I didn't know 'wumao' are paid also for downvoting :)

[collinsl]

Re: Typical

It's part of any liar's repertoire to blame back. Just look at Trump, I don't think anyone could reasonably call him communist.

[harrys]

jeez you never refute lies with the truth

didnt the new generation of youngies ever read orwell at school

[Anonymous Coward]

Your comment made my day. Such rare gems is the main reason I visit elReg, even though the bulk of its comments are often repetitive rant, without possibility to learn new things.

I have reviewed your older comments, and I am starting to believe that even 0-20 downvotes sometimes appear on genius ones. Or only a few upvotes or near 0-0 are given to very good ones. Could it be because the majority of judges are mediocre by definition (normal curve). It could also be because I am biased, as I think similarly. Yet innovations often seem obvious post factum. So are good ideas.

Please keep posting without counting likes. The only thing I question is your veganism, as it may impact your longevity (check Doctor Berg on YT, he is good).

[martinusher]

Apparently in the US reading an entire book isn't that common practice now among high school students. (See Atlantic article "The Elite College Students Who Don't Know How to Read Books" -- https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2024/11/the-elite-college-students-who-cant-read-books/679945/ )

[Anonymous Coward]

conspiracy fodder.

That'll fan the flames, there have been all sorts of idiot conspiracy theories over the years about Intel chips, including claims that one generation included 3G surveillance tech in the CPU, usually based on technically illiterate readings of intel press releases.

Not that I'd be surprised at all if the NSA have backdoor access to all sorts of tech.

[Mishak]

NSA Backdoors

Not chip level, but the NSA do (did?) run an "upgrade factory".

[Roj Blake]

Re: NSA Backdoors

Yep. If Snowden taught us anything it's that if the NSA can install a backdoor, they will.

[Anonymous Coward]

@AC - Re: conspiracy fodder.

Problem is those idiotic conspiracies are useful in hiding the real ones.

If up to last year somebody would have told me you can hide remotely-controlled bombs in mobile devices, I would surely have dismissed him as a lunatic.

When the stakes are so high in the confrontation between the two super-powers, anything is possible. Should I remind you of a certain NSA backdoored encryption algorithm being pushed as a federal standard ?

[Groo The Wanderer]

Every nation has security "laws" that businesses have to follow that aren't known to the public because they're "national security" issues.

This is not a denial Intel has done - to anyone with a functioning brain cell, it's an admission.

[Anonymous Coward]

Especially since US laws can be applied anywhere in the universe...

[ChrisElvidge]

Well, stop buying Intel chips

If you're so worried about backdoors, stop buying the chips.

[collinsl]

Re: Well, stop buying Intel chips

This is a precursor to them doing exactly that. The playbook probably looks something like this:

1. Develop own chip manufacturing industry (been going on for the last 10+ years, mostly there now)

2. Find a convenient "excuse" to ban foreign imports on security grounds

3. Ban foreign imports on security grounds

4. Your local manufacturers profit

[Omnipresent]

LMFAO

@ china.

[pavlecom]

.. evolving hydra

The NSA are evolve so much that they're even above hardware now, a God mod.

Elizabeth Goitein

@LizaGoitein

If the bill becomes law, any company or individual that provides ANY service whatsoever may be forced to assist in NSA surveillance, as long as they have access to equipment on which communications are transmitted or stored—such as routers, servers, cell towers, etc. 6/25

4:50 PM · Apr 15, 2024

[Throatwarbler Mangrove]

Well, this article . . .

. . . has certainly brought out the cranks in the comments.

It's certainly believable that the NSA has asked Intel to include one or more exploitable vulnerabilities in its microcode, which of course Intel would have to deny. It's also possible that any vulnerabilities are simply the result of accident/incompetence (take your pick as to which one). Hanlon's Razor would seem to apply, barring specific evidence of NSA intervention. The notion that this accusation is a response to the banning of Chinese products in the West certainly holds water as well.

In short, there's a lot going on, and it will be very interesting to see if China can produce concrete evidence of their accusation.

[Groo The Wanderer]

Re: Well, this article . . .

Given the well know FACT of NSA overreach and violations of the regulations on their operations, I have absolutely no doubt that such backdoors exist in every nation's products. It's not "conspiracy theory" fodder; it's just an acceptance of the fact that nation states are paranoid as hell and will do anything to retain their position (or improve it) in the global hierarchy.

[Spanners]

So was the hype about Huawei just projection then?

Whenever I hear one group of politicians say that the other lot are doing "X" I tend to suspect that the complainers would like to, or already do, "X".

This sounds like this was the case with Huawei. Many of us wondered if this was the real reason instead of protectionism. After all, if I can't get Huawei, I most definitely don't want a US equivalent!

[BPontius]

China has quite a pair to accuse anyone of backdooring or tampering, when they monitor\control every aspect of life using those very techniques. NSA went on a hacking spree after 9/11 and I have no doubt much of that is still very active. With the FBI playing catch up. I have read reports that the NSA has broken most of the common encryption used on the Web\Internet, all this "going dark" nonsense from the NSA and FBI is pure fiction. Since the NSA has an active part in developing, approving and controlling encryption algorithms\protocols with NIST and have been caught multiple times sneaking in their own doctored versions, not a unreasonable conclusion.

[A random security guy]

Intel does need to create backdoors for the NSA

Intel products have had security issues going back decades. Why does it need to create new ones. And I am being really serious; they have ignored warnings for a long time.