Tuesday, March 13th 2018

13 Major Vulnerabilities Discovered in AMD Zen Architecture, Including Backdoors

Security researchers with Israel-based CTS-Labs, have discovered a thirteen security vulnerabilities for systems based on AMD Zen processors. The thirteen new exploits are broadly classified into four groups based on the similarity in function of the processor that they exploit: "Ryzenfall," "Masterkey," "Fallout," and "Chimera."

The researchers "believe that networks that contain AMD computers are at a considerable risk," and that malware can "survive computer reboots and re-installations of the operating system, while remaining virtually undetectable by most endpoint security solutions," such as antivirus software. They also mention that in their opinion, "the basic nature of some of these vulnerabilities amounts to complete disregard of fundamental security principles. This raises concerning questions regarding security practices, auditing, and quality controls at AMD."
Since this story went up some follow ups were posted:1. "Masterkey": This is an exploit of the Secure Boot feature, which checks if nothing has been tampered with on your machine while it was powered down (i.e. changes in firmware, hardware, or the last software state before shutdown). The Masterkey vulnerability gets around this environment integrity check by using an infected system BIOS, which can be flashed even from within Windows (with administrative privileges). This does not mean that the user has to modify and flash the BIOS manually before becoming vulnerable, the malware can do that on the fly once it is running. Theoretically, Secure Boot should validate the integrity of the BIOS, but apparently this can be bypassed, exploiting bugs in the Secure Processor's metadata parsing. Once the BIOS signature is out of the way, you can put pretty much any ARM Cortex A5 compatible code into the modified BIOS, which will then execute inside the ARM-based Secure Processor - undetectable to any antivirus software running on the main CPU, because the antivirus software running on the CPU has no way to scan inside the Secure Processor.

2. "Ryzenfall" is a class of vulnerabilities targeting Secure Processor, which lets a well-designed malware stash its code into the Secure Processor of a running system, to get executed for the remainder of the system's up-time. Again, this attack requires administrative privileges on the host machine, but can be performed in real-time, on the running system, without modifying the firmware. Secure Processor uses system RAM, in addition to its own in-silicon memory on the processor's die. While this part of memory is fenced off from access by the CPU, bugs exist that can punch holes into that protection. Code running on the Secure Processor has complete access to the system; Microsoft Virtualization-based Security (VBS) can be bypassed and additional malware can be placed into system management storage, where it can't be detected by traditional antivirus software. Windows Defender Credentials Guard, a component that stores and authenticates passwords and other secure functions on the machine, can also be bypassed and the malware can spread over the network to other machines, or the firmware can be modified to exploit "Masterkey", which persists through reboots, undetectable.

3. "Fallout": This class of vulnerabilities affects only AMD EPYC servers. It requires admin privileges like the other exploits, and has similar effects. It enables an attacker to gain access to memory regions like Windows Isolated User Mode / Kernel Mode (VTL1) and Secure Management RAM of the CPU (which are not accessible, even with administrative privileges). Risks are the same as "Ryzenfall", the attack vector is just different.

4. "Chimera": This class of vulnerabilities is an exploitation of the motherboard chipset (e.g. X370 also known as Promontory). AMD outsourced design of their Ryzen chipsets to Taiwanese ASMedia, which is a subsidiary of ASUS. You might know the company from the third-party USB 3.0 and legacy PCI chips on many motherboards. The company has been fined for lax security practices in the past, and numerous issues were found in their earlier controller chips. For the AMD chipset, it looks like they just copy-pasted a lot of code and design, including vulnerabilities. The chipset runs its own code that tells it what to do, and here's the problem: Apparently a backdoor has been implemented that gives any attacker knowing the right passcode full access to the chipset, including arbitrary code execution inside the chipset. This code can now use the system's DMA (direct memory access) engine to read/write system memory, which allows malware injection into the OS. To exploit this attack vector, administrative privileges are required. Whether DMA can access the fenced off memory portions of the Secure Processor, to additionally attack the Secure Processor through this vulnerability, is not fully confirmed, however, the researchers verified it works on a small number of desktop boards. Your keyboard, mouse, network controllers, wired or wireless, are all connected to the chipset, which opens up various other attack mechanisms like keyloggers (that send off their logs by directly accessing the network controller without the CPU/OS ever knowing about these packets), or logging all interesting network traffic, even if its destination is another machine on the same Ethernet segment. As far as we know, the tiny 8-pin serial ROM chip is connected to the CPU on AMD Ryzen platform, not to the chipset or LPCIO controller, so infecting the firmware might not be possible with this approach. A second backdoor was found that is implemented in the physical chip design, so it can't be mitigated by a software update, and the researchers hint at the requirement for a recall.

AMD's Vega GPUs use an implementation of the Secure Processor, too, so it is very likely that Vega is affected in a similar way. An attacker could infect the GPU, and then use DMA to access the rest of the system through the attacks mentioned above.

The researchers have set up the website AMDFlaws.com to chronicle these findings, and to publish detailed whitepapers in the near future.

AMD provided us with the following statement: "We have just received a report from a company called CTS Labs claiming there are potential security vulnerabilities related to certain of our processors. We are actively investigating and analyzing its findings. This company was previously unknown to AMD and we find it unusual for a security firm to publish its research to the press without providing a reasonable amount of time for the company to investigate and address its findings. At AMD, security is a top priority and we are continually working to ensure the safety of our users as potential new risks arise."

Update March 14 7 AM CET: It seems a lot of readers misunderstand the BIOS flashing part. The requirement is not that the user has to manually flash a different BIOS first before becoming vulnerable. The malware itself will modify/flash the BIOS once it is running on the host system with administrative privileges. Also, the signed driver requirement does not require a driver from any specific vendor. The required driver (which is not for an actual hardware device and just provides low-level hardware access) can be easily created by any hacker. Signing the driver, so Windows accepts it, requires a digital signature which is available from various SSL vendors for a few hundred dollars after a fairly standard verification process (requires a company setup with bank account). Alternatively an already existing signed driver from various hardware utilities could be extracted and used for this purpose.
Source: Many Thanks to Earthdog for the tip
Add your own comment

482 Comments on 13 Major Vulnerabilities Discovered in AMD Zen Architecture, Including Backdoors

#101
the54thvoid
Super Intoxicated Moderator
xkm1948Agree. This entire thing feels like a huge PR scam from the Isreal based “security” firm.
No, it's all salty tears from us. :rolleyes:

And yes, too many people trying to be 'no, this is a big thing' when really, it's not such a biggie given the practicality of the process involved in the security issue. And really, it's too glossy to be anything other than a negative PR campaign, NOT a bona fide security issue notice (like how Google played it's role last year with along NDA). This is threat PR. Only the naive folk here can't see that.
Posted on Reply
#102
dicktracy
The double standard is real. Let's jump the gun and defame the researchers because this is AMD and not Intel. Hell, the AMD defense force has yet to provide actual evidence to discredit each of those findings but somehow someway found a way to link this to Intel. This AMD circlejerk culture, even though it's a vocal minority, has to stop.
Posted on Reply
#103
oxidized
KonceptzWonder how much Intel paid for this?:laugh:
You can't even begin to imagine! :eek:
Posted on Reply
#104
Konceptz
dicktracyThe double standard is real. Let's jump the gun and defame the researchers because this is AMD and not Intel. Hell, the AMD defense force has yet to provide actual evidence to discredit each of those findings but somehow someway found a way to link this to Intel. This AMD circlejerk culture, even though it's a vocal minority, has to stop.
Any evidence to credit said researchers? Ford pointed out many points that back up the smear campaign theory...that surprisingly is shared by a LOT of people across the web. Don't let my avatar fool you, my alliance is purely to price/performance ratio.
Posted on Reply
#105
TheoneandonlyMrK
Wow did'nt see this coming :rolleyes::D

the brassy-ballsy-ness and general bling of this new security firm is amazeballs, their in the wrong game regardless ,they should have definately been a PR company, they have skills.
Even the numbers, 13 vulnerabillities found,wow unlucky for someo_O but a few listed , should'nt it read like the ten commandments plus , not like a supervillan squad.

And I'm loving the balanced views personally(genuinely and not sarcastic), yes there is a bit of salt ,why not , opinions can get that way but i thought this thread would be much worse, might taint my purchasing options but well see yet, It's not like there are options after all ,power-pc maybe?? or a new chinese developed chip er no:D
Posted on Reply
#106
oxidized
KonceptzDon't let my avatar fool you, my alliance is purely to price/performance ratio.
No doubt about it!
Posted on Reply
#107
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
dicktracyLet's jump the gun and defame the researchers because this is AMD and not Intel.
The "researchers" jumped the gun. AMD hasn't even had time yet to reproduce them for verification purposes.

When Specter and Meltdown went public, it was huge news because despite having six months to work on it, they weren't even close to fixing it. Even if one of these 13 ends up being legit, it most likely could have been quietly fixed without any fanfare. In this case, everything the "researchers" did was about maximizing fanfare. That should concern everyone. I hope this doesn't become the new norm but it could.
Posted on Reply
#108
ssdpro
AMD provided us with the following statement: "We have just received a report from a company called CTS Labs claiming there are potential security vulnerabilities related to certain of our processors. We are actively investigating and analyzing its findings.
So AMD wasn't able to discredit the claims after 36 hours of research. Probably some verified vulnerabilities then as they only take a short time to verify. Ugly mess how it was released; a serious security company would WANT the mfg to fix the problems not benefit by exposure. AMD will fix.
Posted on Reply
#109
xkm1948
Power of Reddit. Entire video footage of their “security firm” is all just green screened. Someone over reddit found all the available stock background this firm used for their video.

I am not just calling this BS now, this is market manipulation and scam. Shame on tech sites that took it and run with it WITHOUT doing their own homework. GT90 did way more research than the editors here

Posted on Reply
#110
oxidized
xkm1948Power of Reddit. Entire video footage of their “security firm” is all just green screened. Someone over reddit found all the available stock background this firm used for their video.

I am not just calling this BS now, this is market manipulation and scam. Shame on tech sites that took it and run with it WITHOUT doing their own homework. GT90 did way more research than the editors here
Wow, you're soo keen man
Posted on Reply
#111
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
ssdproSo AMD wasn't able to discredit the claims after 36 hours of research. Probably some verified vulnerabilities then as they only take a short time to verify. Ugly mess how it was released; a serious security company would WANT the mfg to fix the problems not benefit by exposure. AMD will fix.
Not really. If all they provided is a white paper, AMD has to author its own tools then they have to run said tools against a variety of hardware. If the tools indicate some truth to the claims, they have to dig deeper and find out why. The why indicates whether or not it is something that needs to be fixed or not, and how. This process will likely take a month.
Posted on Reply
#112
EarthDog
They provided instructions on how to recreate the issues 'found'. ;)
Posted on Reply
#113
Alphadark
xkm1948Power of Reddit. Entire video footage of their “security firm” is all just green screened. Someone over reddit found all the available stock background this firm used for their video.

I am not just calling this BS now, this is market manipulation and scam. Shame on tech sites that took it and run with it WITHOUT doing their own homework. GT90 did way more research than the editors here

I'm upgrading to Zen+ after seeing this. Good bye i7, wonder if Intel is behind this or some former crypto miners looking for a quick buck manipulating AMD stocks.
Posted on Reply
#114
oxidized
AlphadarkI'm upgrading to Zen+ after seeing this. Good bye i7, wonder if Intel is behind this or some former crypto miners looking for a quick buck manipulating AMD stocks.
Intel, and also nvidia, are most definitely behind this man, get rid of your i7, just do it...
Posted on Reply
#115
EarthDog
I think you are forgetting about the government too... they are watching, and listening, you know................... :roll: :lovetpu:
Posted on Reply
#116
ssdpro
EarthDogThey provided instructions on how to recreate the issues 'found'. ;)
Yes. And google images and stutterstock added those green screen backgrounds 6 hours ago. Even the discredits are discredited... what a world!

This just got a mention on CNBC so watch that stock now that someone knows.
Posted on Reply
#117
dyonoctis
(I know that motherboard isn't exactly a reference, but I'm curious to see how thing are going to evolve from there, dan guido and trail of bits are apparently not on the shady side.)
motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/kzpm5x/amd-secure-processor-ryzen-epyc-vulnerabilities-and-backdoors
" All 13 vulnerabilities are exploitable, according to Dan Guido, the founder of security firm Trail of Bits, whose researchers reviewed the flaws and exploit code before publication last week.
“Each of them works as described,” Guido told me in a phone call.

It’s important to note that all these vulnerabilities require hackers to get on the computers and gain administrative privileges some other way first, such as with a phishing attack that tricks the victim into running a malicious application, according to the CTS researchers and Guido.

This means that they are “second stage” vulnerabilities, which would allow attackers to move from computer to computer inside the same network, or install malware directly inside the processor that can’t get detected by security software. This would allow an attacker to spy on the target without detection."
So apparently those guys send a detailed document to trails of bits, a week before but choosed to alert AMD just 24h before. (How nice of them).
According to this guy the flaws are real:

Posted on Reply
#118
jabbadap
FordGT90ConceptThe "researchers" jumped the gun. AMD hasn't even had time yet to reproduce them for verification purposes.

When Specter and Meltdown went public, it was huge news because despite having six months to work on it, they weren't even close to fixing it. Even if one of these 13 ends up being legit, it most likely could have been quietly fixed without any fanfare. In this case, everything the "researchers" did was about maximizing fanfare. That should concern everyone. I hope this doesn't become the new norm but it could.
Well I agree it's very very poorly executed if that indeed is genuine security firm. But looking on employees backgrounds, I have hard time to discredit their expertise in security.
Posted on Reply
#119
Fouquin
dicktracyThe double standard is real. Let's jump the gun and defame the researchers because this is AMD and not Intel. Hell, the AMD defense force has yet to provide actual evidence to discredit each of those findings but somehow someway found a way to link this to Intel. This AMD circlejerk culture, even though it's a vocal minority, has to stop.
The accused does not generally carry the burden of proof.

When Meltdown and Spectre went public there was sample code, a real-time demonstration, step-by-step info on each avenue of attack. Multiple tech giants had it in-hand for months working on a fix before it went live. This report has none of those things and holds little credence in it's vague descriptions, lack of review, and immediate public exposure.
Posted on Reply
#120
IceScreamer
If this didn't involve such allegations it would be really really funny, almost like an article from The Onion, with the green screened scenes and everything. But this is just lame, a low blow to either smear the company/the new product or for a financial gain through stock trading.

And ffs, the sites name is AMDFlaws.

Also, whether these vulnerabilities are real or not, the tech sites (some at least) have lost a lot of respect in my eyes, posting such news without an in depth research, gotta get them clicks huh.
Posted on Reply
#121
cowie
IceScreamerIf this didn't involve such allegations it would be really really funny, almost like an article from The Onion, with the green screened scenes and everything. But this is just lame, a low blow to either smear the company/the new product or for a financial gain through stock trading.

And ffs, the sites name is AMDFlaws.

Also, whether these vulnerabilities are real or not, the tech sites (some at least) have lost a lot of respect in my eyes, posting such news without an in depth research, gotta get them clicks huh.
I feel like that too about any type of unconfirmed rumors at least when you have people or money involved.
to be fair most real sites show dought because of the way it was brought to the table
Posted on Reply
#122
R-T-B
I hope it's not going to upset w1zzard, but from what limited research I can confirm as a "non-press" member at this time, I'm going to have to side with the users here:

If this is even true, it stinks of an Intel PR stunt.

It's possibly not even true?

What is it doing in the news feed?
IceScreamergotta get them clicks huh.
I think everyone is entitled to an honest mistake and/or "jumping the gun" on occasion. But if this turns out to be false, TPU sure had better follow up with a retraction, I would think.
Posted on Reply
#123
IceScreamer
cowieI feel like that too about any type of unconfirmed rumors at least when you have people or money involved.
Yea, I don't know if it's just me but I see a lot of these kind of "news" lately.
R-T-BI hope it's not going to upset w1zzard, but from what limited research I can confirm as a "non-press" member at this time, I'm going to have to side with the users here:

If this is even true, it stinks of an Intel PR stunt.

It's possibly not even true?

What is it doing in the news feed?



I think everyone is entitled to an honest mistake and/or "jumping the gun" on occasion. But if this turns out to be false, TPU sure had better follow up with a retraction, I would think.
Of course, I am also partly at fault here, because until all of this clears up we don't really know who is right or who is wrong.
Posted on Reply
#124
cowie
R-T-BI hope it's not going to upset w1zzard, but from what limited research I can confirm as a "non-press" member at this time, I'm going to have to side with the users here:

If this is even true, it stinks of an Intel PR stunt.

It's possibly not even true?

What is it doing in the news feed?



I think everyone is entitled to an honest mistake and/or "jumping the gun" on occasion. But if this turns out to be false, TPU sure had better follow up with a retraction, I would think.
yeah but btarunr is such a news hound and has been for years
you guys haveta know he is crazy for news I think he is like, screw it let god sort it out.
there was no facebook or twitter or even good goggle we had him and wizz
Posted on Reply
#125
thesmokingman
CrAsHnBuRnXpTake THAT AMD. I dont wanna hear the fanbois anymore.
:laugh:
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Jan 23rd, 2025 22:39 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts