Gabriele Svelto (gabriele.svelto.delete@this.gmail.com) on October 5, 2018 1:53 am wrote:
> Doug S (foo.delete@this.bar.bar) on October 4, 2018 1:45 pm wrote:
> > If the people who know
> > something about it are keeping quiet for whatever reason
> > (maybe they later signed an NDA with the government
> > to get access to additional information, or they put a gag
> > order on them on national security grounds) then the
> > spokesperson reports a categorical denial because they don't have any information to the contrary.
>
> Or simply they don't want to lose face. Both Amazon and Apple are dealing with a lot of data that
> isn't theirs and admitting that they've been breached could have severe consequences for them.


I think what Bloomberg asserts makes Apple and Amazon come out smelling like roses...

The fact they found these issues AT ALL means they are 100% on the ball. No company can avoid having bugged hardware delivered to them, the question is whether when it happens it is found or remains undetected for years. In both cases it was detected quickly, and both acted immediately to dump the offending hardware. Each found it isolated to a small part of their overall footprint, it wasn't like it was a widespread thing. No doubt they've put processes in place to make it even more likely to be detected in the future.

How much do you think the average company does to check the hardware they are delivered? I'd guess exactly zero, except for a tiny segment of very large companies with the kind of resources and expertise that Apple and Amazon have at their disposal.