Thursday, March 15th 2018

CTS Labs Posts Some Clarifications on AMD "Zen" Vulnerabilities

CTS-Labs the research group behind the AMD "Zen" CPU vulnerabilities, posted an addendum to its public-release of the whitepaper, in an attempt to dispel some of the criticism in their presentation in the absence of technical details (which they shared with AMD and other big tech firms). In their clarification whitepaper, quoted below, they get into slightly more technical details on each of the four vulnerability classes.
Clarification About the Recent Vulnerabilities
[CTS Labs] would like to address the many technical points and misunderstandings with a few technical clarifications about the vulnerabilities. The vulnerabilities described in our site are second-stage vulnerabilities. What this means is that the vulnerabilities are mostly relevant for enterprise networks, organizations and cloud providers.

Computers on enterprise networks occasionally get compromised - whether through phishing attempts, zero-day exploits or employees downloading the wrong file. High-security enterprise networks are equipped to deal with these kinds of "every-day" attacks. They do this by keeping their systems up to date, enabling security features, and employing additional measures such as endpoint security solutions.

The vulnerabilities described in amdflaws.com could give an attacker that has already gained initial foothold into one or more computers in the enterprise a significant advantage against IT and security teams.

The only thing the attacker would need after the initial local compromise is local admin privileges and an affected machine. To clarify misunderstandings - there is no need for physical access, no digital signatures, no additional vulnerability to reflash an unsigned BIOS. Buy a computer from the store, run the exploits as admin - and they will work (on the affected models as described on the site).

Attackers in possession of these vulnerabilities would receive the following additional capabilities:
  • Persistency: Attackers could load malware into the AMD Secure Processor before the CPU starts. From this position they can prevent further BIOS updates and remain hidden from security products. This level of persistency is extreme - even if you reinstall the OS or try to reflash the BIOS - it won't work. The only way to remove the attacker from the chip, would be to start soldering out chips. (we have seen a motherboard that had a socket where you can switch chips - then you could just put a new SPI chip).
  • Stealth: Sitting inside the AMD Secure Processor or the AMD Chipset is, at the moment, outside the reach of virtually all security products. AMD chips could become a safe haven for attackers to operate from.
  • Network Credential Theft: The ability to bypass Microsoft Credentials Guard and steal network credentials, for example credentials left by the IT department on the affected machine. We have a PoC version of mimikatz that works even with Credential Guard enabled. Stealing domain credentials could help attackers to move to higher value targets in the network.
  • Specific AMD Secure Processor features for cloud providers, such as Secure Encrypted Virtualization, could be circumvented or disabled by these vulnerabilities.
What was it tested on?
These are the machines we have tested the vulnerabilities on. On our site, every red circle in the vulnerabilities map represents a working PoC that was tested in our lab.

This is the list of hardware that has been tested in our lab:
  • BIOSTAR B350 GT3 Ryzen Motherboard.
  • GIGABYTE AB350-GAMING 3
  • HP EliteDesk 705 G3 SFF Ryzen Pro machine
  • HP Envy X360 Ryzen Mobile Laptop
  • TYAN B8026T70AV16E8HR EPYC SERVER
  • GIGABYTE MZ31-AR0 EPYC SERVER
RYZENFALL, FALLOUT
Requirements
  • Physical access is not required. An attacker would only need to be able to run an EXE with local admin privileges on the machine.
Impact:
  • Write to SMM memory, leading to code execution in SMM.
  • Reading and/or tampering with Credential Guard VTL-1 memory through the PSP.
  • Ryzenfall-4, which achieves code execution inside the PSP, leads to all the attacker capabilities described above, as well as the capability to tamper with the PSP and its security features.
  • An attacker can use RYZENFALL or FALLOUT to bypass Windows Credential Guard, steal network credentials, and then use these to move laterally through Windows-based enterprise networks
MASTERKEY
Requirements:
  • Physical access is not required. An attacker would only need to be able to run an EXE with local admin privileges on the machine.
  • Wait for reboot.
Impact:
The MASTERKEY set of vulnerabilities enable an attacker to execute unsigned code inside the PSP. Totaling a complete compromise of the Secure Processor. The exploit reflashes the BIOS to take advantage of the vulnerability:
  • On some motherboards - this works out of the box. This is because PSP firmware is often ignored by BIOS signature checks.
  • In other cases - RYZENFALL #1-2 could be used as a prerequisite for MASTERKEY to achieve code execution in SMM and bypass BIOS signature checks made in SMM code.
  • Even if all else fails, we believe using RYZENFALL-4 to write to SPI flash from inside the PSP is probably possible.
CHIMERA
Requirements:
  • Physical access is not required. An attacker would only need to be able to run an EXE with local admin privileges on the machine.
Impact:
The CHIMERA set of vulnerabilities are a set Manufacturer Backdoors left on the AMD Chipset, developed by Taiwanese company ASMedia.
  • This allows for an attacker to inject malicious code into the chip and take over the chipset (Read/Write/Execute).
  • One set of backdoors in implemented in firmware, while the other is implemented in the actual logic gates of the chip (ASIC). Both yield to the same impact.
Source: Safe Firmware
Add your own comment

89 Comments on CTS Labs Posts Some Clarifications on AMD "Zen" Vulnerabilities

#76
Easo
If the attacker has admin access, he has won the most of the battle already.
Is this a security hole? Yes. Are the huge, screaming names and shitty webpages inciting panic justified. Absolutely not.
Posted on Reply
#77
Chaitanya
lanlaggerI am really sad seing this Low quality posts and attitude from TPU personal !!
let me explain:
Low quality posts from TPU staff - you basically gave free Press (all they ever could wanted) to Stock price manipulators (multiple times - when lot of other tech portals stopped after first news, waiting for some more credible source confirmations).
Low quality attitude from TPU staff - sadly in this case self explanatory :(
Lets not discuss TPU staffs IQ of regurgitating wccftech level news posts and this new bot based censoring system here on this post. If you want create a thread in general discussion forum.

That Anandtechs interview raises more questions than answers. Also people claiming amd fanboys who blasted Intel for spectre/meltdown seem to have amnesia of events that tooks place when those bugs were discovered. Intel, AMD and ARM all had 6 months before bugs were made knowm to general public. Intel was the one who went to notify Chinese and Amazon regarding the security holes to make additional measurements to improve their infrastructre. This Cts is just targetting AMd for Asmedia bugs which are in use with millions of Intel motherboards as well.
Posted on Reply
#78
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
ChaitanyaThis Cts is just targetting AMd for Asmedia bugs which are in use with millions of Intel motherboards as well
The way they write sounds more like a smear libel case though, aka a panic mode from a certain company...
Posted on Reply
#79
Chaitanya
eidairaman1The way they write sounds more like a smear libel case though, aka a panic mode from a certain company...
It was very surprising that only AMD was targetted for use of Asmedia chips when those chips are common factor across the industry. Everyday more red flags are going up with regards to this mess.
Posted on Reply
#80
jabbadap
ChaitanyaIt was very surprising that only AMD was targetted for use of Asmedia chips when those chips are common factor across the industry. Everyday more red flags are going up with regards to this mess.
Well they are targeting AM4 Promontory chipset, which is made by ASmedia not by amd itself and it's in every AM4 board. So if that Chimera vulnerability is legit, it will affect all asmedia chipset out there.
Posted on Reply
#82
Chaitanya
jabbadapWell they are targeting AM4 Promontory chipset, which is made by ASmedia not by amd itself and it's in every AM4 board. So if that Chimera vulnerability is legit, it will affect all asmedia chipset out there.
xkm1948Acknowledged all AsMedia based USB chipsets are vulnerable, yet still targeting just one specific company. If there is any concern it should be Intel MoBo which has way higher market share and they got 0 mention. Fishy AF.

CTS can spin this whatever they want. At least this end user is not buying into their BS.

Security experts, including Linus, weighs in on the situation after thr anandtech phone call.

www.realworldtech.com/forum/?threadid=175139&curpostid=175169


Lets see what they say after TPU phone call
Posted on Reply
#83
AsRock
TPU addict
ssdproThe problem is AMD hasn't handled it well. AMD has had no comment other than their strange blog post acknowledging the investigation into the claimed vulnerabilities. That post wasn't even written in clear professional terms ("certain of our processors" and doesn't even have a date). Until AMD writes/speaks and either declares the vulnerabilities fake or explains complexity it will continue being a story and TPU needs to cover it. You don't get bona fide debunks from random users named "BiGchiCKens14", you get it from the company.
You what ?, AMD should not have to say any thing, well except what they have done and that they are looking in to it. AMD did not even have chance to test this out fully yet and i am sure if they had 6 months like Intel did with the last vulnerabilities they would of had much more to say about it. But that was not the case here CTS acted like A holes ( i was thinking of a much more fitting word but ) by giving AMD time to actually test their claims which oddly enough are not willing to prove.

So best thing to do is sit and wait until we get solid proof on the situation, i amd sure AMD will do when the time is right and these things take time which they have not been given..
Posted on Reply
#84
Hood
AsRockSo best thing to do is sit and wait until we get solid proof on the situation, i amd sure AMD will do when the time is right and these things take time which they have not been given..
That's all we can do - but my concern is that in the meantime, all AMD systems may be vulnerable, especially the EPYC servers that are in use now, which could be spreading some of these exploits to other machines as we speak. That's why it was wrong for CTS to not wait a proper amount of time. Now that the exploits have been published, black hat hackers know what to target, and know there's no defense against it (for now).
Posted on Reply
#85
AsRock
TPU addict
HoodThat's all we can do - but my concern is that in the meantime, all AMD systems may be vulnerable, especially the EPYC servers that are in use now, which could be spreading some of these exploits to other machines as we speak. That's why it was wrong for CTS to not wait a proper amount of time. Now that the exploits have been published, black hat hackers know what to target, and know there's no defense against it (for now).
Well that should be on CTS acting irresponsible and should be taken to the cleaners for acting the way they did. Sure AMD need to do some thing and chances are they are doing all they can.

In the end it's not a good place to be in but it's hardly AMD's fault or at least proven. It's a shame AMD cannot get the courts or who ever to get CTS to hand over there findings to get this resolved ASAP. In fact i think the government should step in and force they to do so.
Posted on Reply
#86
Hood
It is AMD's fault, if you look at it objectively. They designed these chips on a shoestring budget, (and did a good job, on the surface). But in these days of frequent major hacks, it was irresponsible of AMD to do so without considering possible vulnerabilities. Their budget didn't have room for millions of dollars worth of testing and validation, and shortcuts were obviously taken. But they're still responsible for these flaws (their quick success with Ryzen came at the expense of users unwitting vulnerability to exploits). Just as Intel was ultimately responsible for the Spectre/Meltdown fiasco. Lack of due diligence on the part of both companies. Like with any product that causes damage or loss to someone - lawsuits are inevitable. And you certainly can't blame the consumers, all they did was trust a major company to do the right thing.
Also, CTS has already given AMD detailed examples of how to reproduce all the exploits (as stated in the original White paper). Isn't that what you mean by "handing over their findings"?
Posted on Reply
#87
AsRock
TPU addict
Thats like saying it's Microsofts fault that any of there OS's were not immune from viruses and what ever. There is always some thing else, Always.

I guess they did some what of a decent thing then giving that data to AMD but still, they should be taken to the cleaners for being douch bags.
Posted on Reply
#88
Hood
AsRockThats like saying it's Microsofts fault that any of there OS's were not immune from viruses and what ever. There is always some thing else, Always.

I guess they did some what of a decent thing then giving that data to AMD but still, they should be taken to the cleaners for being douch bags.
So AMD should sue CTS for causing them financial loss (drop in stock price because of negative publicity, if that actually occurs). Depends on Whether they can convince a jury that it was intentional, or possibly presented in a negligent way. AMD stock went up the next day, now it's very slowly dropping. It will be very important that AMD puts the right spin on this, and they can't wait too long, or it makes it worse. I hope they do it right and weather this latest storm with no lasting damage. We need them to be healthy and competitive, to keep Intel and NVIDIA in check (and provide decent budget solutions).
Posted on Reply
#89
DeathtoGnomes
HoodSo AMD should sue CTS for causing them financial loss (drop in stock price because of negative publicity, if that actually occurs). Depends on Whether they can convince a jury that it was intentional, or possibly presented in a negligent way. AMD stock went up the next day, now it's very slowly dropping. It will be very important that AMD puts the right spin on this, and they can't wait too long, or it makes it worse. I hope they do it right and weather this latest storm with no lasting damage. We need them to be healthy and competitive, to keep Intel and NVIDIA in check (and provide decent budget solutions).
The law suit, if any, will prolly come after AMD confirms any/all CTS claims. CTS should be reported to the SEC as well for attempted stock manipulation. As for AMD stock, its been on a steady decline for a while, and if you look the charts, price spikes are very common. IMO. AMD doesnt have to put any spin on this, just face it head on.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 13th, 2026 22:26 CST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

TPU on YouTube

Controversial News Posts