this post was submitted on 09 Mar 2025
192 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

67536 readers
4734 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 47 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Finally, some technical details that were sorely lacking from yesterday's article.

Anyway, having direct unprivileged R/W access to platform memory is indeed a security hole, no matter the vendor.

[–] pelya@lemmy.world 24 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Anyway, having direct unprivileged R/W access to platform memory is indeed a security hole, no matter the vendor.

It is not. ESP32 is an embedded chip with less than one megabyte of RAM. It cannot run apps or load websites with any malicious code, it only runs the firmware that you flash on it, nothing else, and of course your firmware has full access to every chip feature. If your firmware has a security hole, it's not the chip's fault.

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Try reading the article next time.

[–] pelya@lemmy.world 16 points 2 weeks ago

There was no mention of over-the-air exploit, so eh.

[–] Godort@lemm.ee 36 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I mean, this doesn't really change anything from a practical perspective. It just highlights that the verbage in the press release was alarmist.

It's still a security concern that most users will be unaware of.

[–] ozymandias117@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

Yes, in the sense that every device you own has these same commands

The alarmist of the original was that this was somehow unique to the esp32

If your device has Bluetooth, it has these commands

[–] TxzK@lemmy.zip 23 points 2 weeks ago

But but it's Chinese and Chinese tech bad

[–] kubica@fedia.io 23 points 2 weeks ago

Overall we at Dark Mentor do consider the use of VSCs granting the capability to read and write memory, flash, or registers to be bad security design. It’s bad design for Espressif the same as it’s bad design for Broadcom, Texas Instruments, and any other vendor that uses it. This issue is now being tracked as CVE-2025-27840.

[–] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 18 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Potato, potato....

Whether we call them 'undocumented commands' or a 'backdoor', the affect is more or less the same; a series of high-level commands not listed within the specs, preventing systems engineers/designers from planning around vulnerabilities and their potential for malicious use.

[–] futatorius@lemm.ee 7 points 2 weeks ago

In that case, every stack that you use is riddled with those and we are all hosed. And yet somehow your computer, your phone and the internet keep on working most of the time.

[–] ShadowRam@fedia.io 6 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

The dude that wrote this blog is a goof....

defines backdoor as “relating to something that is done secretly

effectively constitute a “private API”, and a company’s choice to not publicly document their private API

Idiot thinks these are two different things....

Are they are trying to argue that malicious intent is needed to define it as a back door?

Moron..

[–] FanBlade 11 points 2 weeks ago

You’re very smart. I didn’t realize that until you called someone a goof, idiot and moron, but now it’s very clear that you have far superior intelligence.

[–] mousetail@programming.dev 6 points 2 weeks ago

A backdoor requires malicious intent, otherwise it's just a vulnerability

[–] SharkAttak@kbin.melroy.org 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I don't get the downvotes, wether you call it backdoor or private API it's a security hole, and nitpicking on its name won't help fixing it.

[–] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 weeks ago

It was all positive until the guy below me came in throwing insults. Then people started piling downvotes on both....

[–] embed_me@programming.dev 14 points 2 weeks ago

Thanks. I was looking for an explanation like this

[–] fubarx@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 weeks ago

I tried to offer a gentler backgrounder on this HCI business: https://lemmy.ml/comment/17160273

The opcodes that actually jumped out at me more than the undocumented ones were the ones that erases the flash.

But the conclusion stands. None of this is a 'backdoor' unless you can secretly access it from the wireless side and nothing in the presentation points to that. If I had to guess, the opcodes are for QA and tuning on the manufacturing line.