PrivSec-dev/privsec.dev
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/PrivSec-dev/privsec.dev synced 2024-12-22 12:51:34 -05:00
Code

Update content/posts/hardware/Misinformation on x86 Hardware/index.md

Browse Source 
Co-authored-by: friendly-rabbit-35 <169707731+friendly-rabbit-35@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Tommy <contact@tommytran.io>
This commit is contained in:
Tommy 2024-06-11 20:41:31 -07:00 committed by GitHub
parent 7c38c5f5c0
commit e7ca0f066c
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG Key ID: B5690EEEBB952194
1 changed files with 1 additions and 1 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

2
content/posts/hardware/Misinformation on x86 Hardware/index.md
View File

@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ For attack surface reduction, you should absolutely disable it. If you do not ha
With that said, don't let the scary claims about "remote management" spook you --- if some sort of hypothetical backdoor is actually implemented this way, it will not be hard to detect. There are better ways to implement a backdoor as discussed above, and if you don't trust the CPU vendor you should avoid them as a whole, not just the vPro models.
Some people recommend buying AMD instead of Intel to avoid the possibility of having Intel AMT. However, they also miss a very simple fact that AMD has an equivalent technology for their Ryzen Pro CPU - [AMD DASH](https://www.amd.com/system/files/documents/out-of-band-client-management-overview.pdf).
Some people recommend buying AMD instead of Intel to avoid the possibility of having Intel AMT. However, they also overlook the very simple fact that AMD has an equivalent technology for their Ryzen Pro CPU: [AMD DASH](https://www.amd.com/system/files/documents/out-of-band-client-management-overview.pdf).
### Intel vPro