Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Kaspersky Lab Says Report Claiming China Hacked Apple's Former Server Supplier is Likely 'Untrue'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I trust Kaspersky light years before I trust anything from Bloomberg or anything from the US media.
China is a rising economic and technological competitor to US, that threatens US dominance. This is China's crime in the eyes of the US. Bloomberg among others are being fed stories that damage China. Its all part of an orchestrated campaign against China. The mainstream media plays a big part in this campaign.
China is a rising economic and technological competitor to US, that threatens US dominance. This is China's crime in the eyes of the US. Bloomberg among others are being fed stories that damage China. Its all part of an orchestrated campaign against China. The mainstream media plays a big part in this campaign.
My conspiracy theory is that the Russians scammed Bloomberg (a classic disinformation campaign), with the goal of making us forget we need to be worried about Russia (like the trade war with China... point public attention away from Russia). So, if Kaspersky is working on Russia's behalf, why would they say the Chinese didn't do it? One would then have to suppose that Kaspersky's goal is to make it seem like Russia isn't behind the whole thing... Circles within circles within circles. No wonder conspiracy theorists seem mad.
I think I'll stick with the classic quote attributed to Freud, "And sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."
I think I'll stick with the classic quote attributed to Freud, "And sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."
Tell your customers to pull down their pants and moon their monitors.
Send that to the People's Liberation Army.
My thoughts though are what about companies like Apple and Netflix who have or still do use Amazon Web Services in there backend? Have they been compromised because of that?
Considering what's come out so far and an article published on Ars Technica today I'm starting to wonder if the whole article on Bloomberg is just result of one big game of broken telephone by journalists not familiar with the subject matter. The other alternative is a Polybius-style hoax where you take a whole bunch of urban legends and things that have happened in different places to create a hoax that's totally made up, but still very hard to conclusively disprove.
You get scarily close when you combine what the infosec scene has been saying about the threat of hardware and firmware bugs for years already, what the NSA has been up to according to the Snowden leaks, Chinese state and private actors actually hacking American companies and finally the severe security vulnerabilities found in the firmware of Supermicro server boards around the same time that actually caused a number of companies, including Apple, to dump them after they were publicly documented.
In other words it seems to be more and more likely that this is either a hoax or gross incompetence on part of the two journalists who wrote the Bloomberg piece.
You get scarily close when you combine what the infosec scene has been saying about the threat of hardware and firmware bugs for years already, what the NSA has been up to according to the Snowden leaks, Chinese state and private actors actually hacking American companies and finally the severe security vulnerabilities found in the firmware of Supermicro server boards around the same time that actually caused a number of companies, including Apple, to dump them after they were publicly documented.
In other words it seems to be more and more likely that this is either a hoax or gross incompetence on part of the two journalists who wrote the Bloomberg piece.
Not exactly. Unlike the FBI, Bloomberg reporters were given more than a meager five days to write that article. They took all the time they needed and produced the best report they could. If you want evidence, you let the investigators, y’know, be thorough. If you want to look like you want evidence but don’t really want any, you don’t.
The only way to find out whether there is proof in any type of comparable situation is to do a top to bottom investigation, which is what Apple appears to have done. They were willing to scrutinize every possibility in detail.
It is not the same. Ford is not an anonymous source.
If it was the same it would be Apple claiming they were hacked, and a lot of people would not believe them without solid proof.
So, we’re now talking about how nations trying to hack each others computers is the equivalent of raping kids, and then getting made supreme judge over everyone in the country for life.
Ok, stay classy.
Ok, stay classy.
The good news: Supply chain security will definitely improve after this controversy settles down.
Sure, yeah, right. I'll trust the Russians on Chinese spying! HAHAHAHAHA!
That's like trusting Tim Cook when he says, "There are no FM radios in iPhones" during a hurricane when independent tech firms have already found the FM circuitry!
Circuitry without an antenna. Not usable to receive FM radio.
Sure, yeah, right. I'll trust the Russians on Chinese spying! HAHAHAHAHA!
Yep. I trust Russians and Chinese just as much as I trust Bloomberg.
[doublepost=1539348152][/doublepost]
It's kind of hard to show a proof if a proof does not exist.
Sure, yeah, right. I'll trust the Russians on Chinese spying! HAHAHAHAHA!
That's like trusting Tim Cook when he says, "There are no FM radios in iPhones" during a hurricane when independent tech firms have already found the FM circuitry!
FM radios need an antenna to function. Just because a supplier have included optional FM functionality in its wireless chip, that needs to be wired up to an external antenna as well. That’s why Samsung Galaxy’s FM radio would only work when you connect a wired headset.
Securities fraud.
[doublepost=1539351665][/doublepost]Why no link to the Kaspersky statement?
except that the FBI was limited in scope and could not get the evidence because they were not allowed.
The Apple/Amazon story still feels like bunk to me.
However, there is a named source in Bloomberg's followup article about the Supermicro servers getting into a telecom company. His details are interesting. And none of the telecom company's statements in response have vigorously denied it--they all used wishy-washy language. T-Mobile declined to comment. The FBI declined to comment.
It is a markedly different response than the Apple/Amazon story.
I'm a hardware engineer. Specifically chip technology.
In the other thread I detailed why this hack was not possible for a number of reasons.
The easiest hack would be through EFI/BIOS and requires no extra hardware.
That's like trusting Tim Cook when he says, "There are no FM radios in iPhones" during a hurricane when independent tech firms have already found the FM circuitry!
Here's a diagram of an FM receiver:
To receive and playback an FM signal, you need all of these components. The "FM circuitry" you're describing is just that big triangle, plus MAYBE the power supply. It's not hooked up to an analog amplifier or ADC and it's not hooked up to an antenna.
It's an FM radio in the same way that a glass of barley water is a beer: it has some of the same components, but it's not the same thing in any meaningful respect, and no amount of software can fill that gap.
Can you provide a source for that schematic, because it looks more like an AM receiver to me.Here's a diagram of an FM receiver:
To receive and playback an FM signal, you need all of these components. The "FM circuitry" you're describing is just that big triangle, plus MAYBE the power supply. It's not hooked up to an analog amplifier or ADC and it's not hooked up to an antenna.
An LM386 is just an audio power amplifier. All it does is amplify the voltage from VR (Vol Control) enough to drive a speaker (LS).
All the RF demodulation is done by VC, L, and the transistors T1 and T2, which also act to rectify the RF signal in a simple envelope detector. At least that's what it looks like to me.
An FM receiver would need a more complex demodulation stage. My guess is an integrated circuit would probably use a PLL (phase-locked loop) rather than some other type of FM demodulator.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demodulation#AM_radio
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_radio#Basic_principles