What is the best non botnet cpu money can buy? is it the fx8350

>>60548254
Rad-hardened 286 in a faraday cage.

>>60548254
You don't have to worry about a CPU being backdoored if you utilize Libre/CoreBoot.

you're not important enough for intel or amd to ever use that
if that's your deal breaker you have two options
>buy a pre-C2D intel cpu
>consult a psychiatrist about your anxiety issues

>>60548254
x86 is inherently botnet but fx 8350 is the more chill of the bunch.

>>60548284
actually you do and libreboot even states that amt cant be turned off even with the source code to it

>>60548288
whats inherently botnet about it? i thought arm was moreso sinxe they started the whole secure ™ backsoor thing

>>60548284
Coreboot/trannyboot are a replacement for system board firmware, they can't and don't touch the ME. Don't spread misinformation. There's so much FUD concerning these matters spewn about that sometimes I think Intel employs a whole department of internet shills to keep people as confused and malinformed on the matters concernining ME as only possible.

>>60548386
AMT is just some software which runs on the ME. It kinda can be disabled by things like erasing most ME firmware SPI flash partitions with me_cleaner, but the ME itself is still running, it has its own internal ROM, and nobody except Intel and whoever they work with currently knows what the ME is doing and what it is capable of on its own.

>>60548254
you could try https://hardenedlinux.github.io/firmware/2016/11/17/neutralize_ME_firmware_on_sandybridge_and_ivybridge.html if you're brave enough

>>60549383
thats the equivalent of keeping a deadly snake thats near you tranquillised

Pentium with MMX Technology

>>60549383
It does what >>60549352 said, i.e. removes AMT but leaves the ME still running. Thus, for the time being, Stallman is still correct with his statement:
>Don't use Intel processors newer than Core2, because they have the "management engine" back door and no one can shut it off.
https://stallman.org/intel.html

He's not quite precise with the "newer than Core2" part though, as there are plenty of Core2 systems which nevertheless have an early version of ME/AMT on board (notably the T60/T61, with both having ME in the NIC, but the former having no firmware installed (thus a stock T60 is possibly equivalent to later Thinkpad with the me_cleaner applied) and the latter having both ME and AMT firmware.

>>60549541
even pentium and old i5 (original i5)?

>>60549621
I am also curious about celeron and atom.

>>60549814
atom does not at all, doesnt even have me. i think pent pent and celeron ha e a disabled me (new ones only obviously)

If it has a PCH (Platform Controller Hub), it has ME. Core2 sytems that had ME had it in the (still separate from the CPU package) northbridge, and in the Ethernet adapter earlier than that. Atom CPUs don't have ME.

>>60548254
Wait what, does /g/ actually believe that there is a botnet in their CPU? Wow, you think Intel and AMD are willing to spend their precious time and money just so they could see you watch some girly cartoons on your meme Linux distros? Wow, thats pathetic and your probably going to die alone.

>>60551767
Yes there is, and it is reality, not a matter of belief. The things shown in the first video below (demonstration of early AMT capabilities done by its implementor) wouln't be possible without what is essentially a hardware rootkit (back then it was embedded in the Ethernet controller, then moved to the northbridge, which later ended up as the PCH embedded within the CPU package itself). The second video shows the take on the matter by Ms. Rutkowska, world-class security specialist and creator of QubesOS.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vmG6rFd_BM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcwngbUrZNg

>>60551767
What is it, thirty, forty years this tactic has been tried -- "you better stop talking about this or I'll call you stupid" -- and has it ever worked once? If we really were as dumb as you accuse, why would we care about being called dumb?

File: Modelare1.jpg (76KB, 600x388px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 600x388px

>>60548254
Sun Blade 2500/Ultra 45 or later dual-core Power Mac G5s
>open firmware
>obscure workstation CPUs that nobody gives a shit about backdooring because they weren't intended for everyday desktop use
>good Linux/BSD support
>fine enough hardware for most actually useful and productive tasks

>still no answers
Bump, I'm interested.

>>60551882
I'm relatively new to this, are there any proven instances of ME being used as a backdoor without the user knowing (and consenting)?

>>60548284
oh sweet child

>>60548254
>fx series
>not knowing PSP

You want a Athlon XP or a Pentium 4 HT ?

>>60548254

probably an lga 771 xeon, those are the last truly uncucked cpus.

>>60552801
It by all means seems potentially possible, and Intel has done nothing to provide any proof to the contrary (as a matter of fact, they keep any details concerning the ME absolutely secret, the only documentation they released relates to AMT software that runs on it, but not ME itself). Obtaining direct proof may be extremely difficult if not downright impossible due to the very nature of ME - it is entirely transparent to the main CPU and any OS that is running on it (only exception is the HECI/MEI interface, but that only allows a peek showing just as much info as the ME allows, which is quite rudimentary at best).

Even if we suppose that there's no malicious intent in the ME, the exploit for AMT shown back in 2009 by Rutkowska's Invisible Things Lab as well as the recent "Silent Bob Is Silent" AMT vulnerability discovered earlier this year clearly demonstrate that bugs in software running on the ME and vulnerabilities which may stem from them can lead to catastrophic exploits which can result in a complete remote compromise of the system in question, which remains entirely transparent to the legitimate user (as he obviously has neither any real insight into nor any power over what the ME is doing). Considering this alone, it's obvious that the presence of circuitry such as the ME on most systems should be highy undesirable.

>>60548254

C2D on SiS chipset.

>>60552374
Is any one using one of these? Even used the blade is over 500$ and the ultra is 900$ plus

>>60554855
Are these the best non-Intel Core2 chipsets? What about Nvidia chipsets from that period?

>>60553142
Since when Fx series got psp

>>60553142
Athlon 64 were botnet somehow?

>>60555063
never.

>>60556141
never

>>60548254
Opteron 62xx, or opensparc cpu.

>>60548254
Wouldn't it be a 9590 downtuned to 8350 levels, since the former is a better binned version of the latter?

>>60557519
theyd still have the sane 130w draw. sure ita silicon lottery but the 8350 out over clocked the 9590 in the world record 8ghz. but you ah its a 9590 at stock oc

>>60548287
>you're not important enough for intel or amd to ever use that
that's dubious, bulk collection is the future and a backdoored computer is wide open to this

>>60551767
Who do you work for, shill?

>>60555063
>>60556462

Anything 2013 comes with such "feature", nice job "po-po".

>>60548254
Build your own RISC-V processor. You can install Linux on it, but you would have to compile everything and basically roll your own distro because nobody makes packages for it.

>>60558663
dont the still manufacturer risc cpus?