That chip looks a lot like a six legged version of what I call PCB resident 'feed through' caps.. I dont know the technical name for them. They are kind of an RFI filter.
They are basically bypass caps with two legs. (although they might also incorporate ferrite materials) (these bypass caps only have three terminals, the ones at the ends are the DC path and the two on the sides at the middle are the ground that has the RF bypassed to it.)
They are kind of a 2D, semi-planar version of the old feed through caps that penetrate a case wall.
They have the same function. There- using a lower quality part might reduce the effectiveness of RFI bypassing.
Which might be all that was required.
In order to enable some back-channel attacks (which could then only be pursued from near the machine physically) all that likely needs to be done is sabotage formerly effective RFI suppression methods.
Making it so a nearby listener might be able to extract enough information to break whatever encryption keys was being used.
This attack would only work if the attacker was within a few meters, most likely. So basically they would have to have access to the data center the servos were in.
Although I have no idea how it fits in, liberalizing services is proposed to double (probably many times more than that, just imagine how much will be saved on wages, money which is now 'wasted' to rent extraction. (/sarcasm)
The hype proposes that business profits globally could be increased many fold by increasing efficiency, which increasingly means moving jobs to the digital economy.
One of the main questions is where will the trade rules require that servers and the actual information be located?
One of the biggest roadblocks to making businesses so very much much much more efficient and reducing costs to the bone (and an eventual shakeout within which most of those businesses get absorbed into others) is who gets to say where the important information thats stored on servers will be.
Can governments - despite their commitments to trade liberalization, think of some excuse to hold it back (and presumably steer that business to well connected insiders in their own country, even though some other provider of the service may be cheaper)
A business like Amazon's 2nd biggest asset after their brand name is their technology, which they (probably) want to keep close to their vests. (I would expect them to!) However, agreements between countries commit countries to switch from in house provision of services to low bidders, biding in an international competition.
Could the country whose information is at issue - or the country whose flag of convenience a corporation flies require some parts be inside their physical country and control, even when its not national security related?
(National security is basically the only area that gets a free pass to remain under individual nation's control)
I have no idea what they are arguing these days. But you can bet it isnt good for the little guy, whose business will likely be put under extreme pressure by global competition, if there is any money to be made in it.
This kind of 'incident' real or not, may be part of the arguments in some way. Countries are jockeying for position in this huge shift and people like us can only guess at their long term strategies.
Home
Help
Search
Login
Register
