Talk:Hardware backdoor
Add topic| This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Suggestions of new sections
[edit]New sections for the article: (Motivations), (Types of hardware backdoors), (Target devices of hardware backdoors), (Detection methods), (Prevention methods). Faltur (talk) 12:15, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
Bad Examples
[edit]I've noticed two examples in the Examples section that should not appear on this page:
1. 2012: Chinese device manufacturer found to carry a backdoor
This is not a hardware backdoor; rather it is a software backdoor that was baked into software that was installed on a limited set of hardware.
2. October 2018: Bloomberg reported an Attack by Chinese spies that infiltrated 30 US companies
This has been proven to be false and should be removed.[1]
Madogstony101 (talk) 03:17, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
References
- ↑ Wemple, Erik. "Your move, Bloomberg". The Washington Post. Washington Post. Retrieved 22 February 2019.
Bloomberg spy chip story?
[edit]The article claimed "an attack by Chinese spies that infiltrated 30 US companies" via Bloomberg. I found it surprising that a widely discredited story is now being pushed as a fact in wikivoice on this article. Typically discredited claims shouldn't have any weight here and should be removed or at minimum, it should have context where many experts checked and stated it was either based on a misunderstanding or it is not only wrong but has so many mistakes that are too frequent to count.
However I am also aware Bloomberg didn't retract but doubled down and claimed without evidence that they can't give their sources due to shadowy world of espionage. Blah blah regardless - such extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence per WP:EXTRAORDINARY and backings in which this claim does not have. If anything, it's the opposite where it's been disputed heavily. I didn't remove the claim but I did add context it was never proven with evidence and is widely disputed by US/UK intelligence and some major companies. JaredMcKenzie (talk) 00:38, 24 September 2026 (UTC)
- C-Class Computer security articles
- Low-importance Computer security articles
- C-Class Computer security articles of Low-importance
- C-Class Computing articles
- Low-importance Computing articles
- All Computing articles
- All Computer security articles
- C-Class Espionage articles
- Low-importance Espionage articles
- Start-Class military history articles
- Start-Class military science, technology, and theory articles
- Military science, technology, and theory task force articles


