• Alphane Moon@lemmy.worldOPM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    16 days ago

    To be honest, the article wasn’t very clear on this, but do we know that the “secondary die hidden under the primary microcontroller” was for malicious purposes?

    I would expect a pen-testing cable to be for more sophisticated than a regular USB-C cable.

    It seems like tomshardware is hinting at the possibility of supply chain attacks, without referencing any newly identified examples.

    • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      16 days ago

      I’m not sure I understand what you’re trying to ask.

      The cable exists for malicious purposes. That’s the purpose of the cable.

      The article seems to be just comparing it to standard cables which just have the circuitry for charging. Since this cable has additional capabilities, can host its own wifi network, etc. it needs additional controllers and antennae to support that.

      Actually reading more of the article… It seems like the author doesn’t really know what the OMG cable is and is trying to frame it as some sort of unexpected thing. Comparing it to a standard USB cable makes no sense.

      • Alphane Moon@lemmy.worldOPM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        16 days ago

        I thought the pen-testing cable was compromised. Which would make for an interesting supply chain attack.

        The article wasn’t really clear on this, but I did get that they were simply referring to the large amount of circuitry.

        • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          16 days ago

          Yeah it’s a weirdly written article if it’s just comparing the OMG cable to regular ones. Doesn’t really explain well what they’re trying to say.