Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Your snark aside, Bloomberg made these claims, it's on them to back it up. Not the other way around. So far, not a single fact has surfaced that lends those claims any credence.



I personally have learned more about the supply chain for various big tech firms. I have learned that something like what the original story described is possible, in that USA-based firms have no reliable way to prevent such hacking. That doesn't mean I believe Bloomberg's version, but then again I rarely do. I'm just not in such a hurry to believe SuperMicro's version either... We don't have to act as if we know what really happened. I don't see why anyone would be so sure that GP's speculation above about the State Department is unfounded either.


The general case of hardware being backdoored is believable, but the problems come down to, not just the lack of any kind of corroborating evidence, but the nature of these specific claims themselves having some hard-to-believe holes in them.

https://www.servethehome.com/investigating-implausible-bloom...

Basic informational hygiene is that the claim is garbage until proven otherwise, "credibility" notwithstanding. There is not only not a single positive reason to believe this story, there is mounting evidence that it should not be believed.


Haha, "credibility". A thing which does not exist.

Seriously, though, it seems that your idea of "basic informational hygiene" conflicts with a basic security posture in this case. We don't have to assume Super Micro has never been hacked, so I don't know why we would assume that. More in keeping with the topic of this thread, we don't have to assume the State Department (or whoever) has never caused a story to be published or discredited, so I don't know why we would assume that.


Hence the scare quotes :)

We're on the internet, a medium in which information can be trivially exchanged. Easily-defeated heuristics like "authority" and "credibility" are meaningless, if not harmful, when individual claims can (and should!) be evaluated on their own merits.

Basic security posture, sure, but nobody's arguing that we should change that and pretend that Supermicro is completely safe. Nothing is ever completely safe.

..but we're talking about a very specific claim which already has a number of gaping holes blown into it.




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: