Published in News

Chinese want Intel chips checked for backdoors

by on18 October 2024


Security issues

The Cybersecurity Association of China (CSAC) said Intel chips flogged in China should be subject to a security review.

The outfit, which is an industry group rather than anything to do with the government,  claimed that Chipzilla had "constantly harmed" the country's national security and interests.

The comments could force China's powerful cyberspace regulator, the Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC), to take action.

"It is recommended that a network security review is initiated on the products Intel sells in China to effectively safeguard China's national security and the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese consumers," CSAC said.

Last year, CAC barred domestic operators of key infrastructure from buying products made by U.S. memory chipmaker Micron Technology after deeming the company's products had failed its network security review.

A similar security review on Intel products could negatively impact the company's revenues, over a quarter of which came from China last year.

The allegations come as China is dealing with a US-led effort to restrict its access to crucial chipmaking equipment and components in what Washington calls a bid to halt the modernisation of China's military.

CSAC's post accuses Intel chips, including Xeon processors used for artificial intelligence tasks, of carrying several vulnerabilities. It concludes that Intel "has major defects when it comes to product quality and security management, indicating that it has an extremely irresponsible attitude towards customers."

The industry group states that operating systems embedded in all Intel processors are vulnerable to backdoors created by the US National Security Agency (NSA).

"This poses a great security threat to the critical information infrastructures of countries worldwide, including China...the use of Intel products poses a serious risk to national security," CSAC said.

 

Last modified on 19 October 2024
Rate this item
(1 Vote)

Read more about: