On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:41 PM, grarpamp <[1]grarpamp@gmail.com>
   wrote:

     On 3/17/16, Rayzer <[2]Rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:
     >> exclusively for attacks that achieve a persistent compromise on a
     >> Chromebook in 'guest mode'
     >
     >
     [3]http://www.zdnet.com/article/google-well-pay-100k-if-you-can-hack
     -a-chromebook-remotely/
     Doesn't this thing use Intel's AMT processor and NIC?
     Intel's probably protected their source code access processes
     with more than $100k against any researcher, same with Google,
     but as we've just seen NSA already FISA'd / moled both their source.
     So what's the difference? Or the point?
     If Google wants to pull a stunt, it should open it's own code
     and start paying out along that new bug discovery asymptote.
     Regardless of whether you sell software / hardware or not...
     "We're closed, and awesome" really doesn't cut it anymore
     when the bad guys have the source everyone else thought
     was closed.

   Most of ChromeOS is open source. The BIOS, AIUI, is Coreboot. Most of
   what isn't open source can't legally be open sourced because it's other
   people's IP, like the codecs, Flash, etc. If you care, go compile and
   run ChromiumOS.

References

   1. mailto:grarpamp@gmail.com
   2. mailto:Rayzer@riseup.net
   3. http://www.zdnet.com/article/google-well-pay-100k-if-you-can-hack-a-chromebook-remotely/