chip
21 stories and discussions about chip, aggregated from every source we track.
Nvidia’s Open Agent Safety Platform uses OpenShell software and a Sentry chip watchdog to trace AI agents and cut them off within milliseconds.
AI drastically shortened its design time; it will only get faster
<p>According to the Wikipedia article <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_C#Cables" rel="ugc">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_C#Cables</a></p> <blockquote> <p>USB-C 3.1 cables are considered full-featured USB-C cables. They are electronically marked <strong>cables that contain a chip</strong> with an ID function based on the configuration channel and vendor-defined messages (VDM) from the USB Power Delivery 2.0 specification. Cable length should be ≤ 2 m for Gen 1 or ≤ 1 m for Gen2. <strong>Electronic ID chip</strong> provides information about product/vendor, cable connectors, USB signalling protocol (2.0, Gen1, Gen 2), passive/active construction, use of VCONN power, supported VBUS current, latency, RX/TX directionality, SOP controller mode, and <strong>hardware/firmware version.</strong></p> </blockquote> <p>Is anyone here aware of USB-C cable teardowns, or analysis of the chips inside? I'm concerned about the security implications of an infected USB cable.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.cs.vu.nl/~ast/intel/" rel="ugc">link</a></p> <p>Here are the updated parts:</p> <blockquote> <p>Note added later: Some people have pointed out online that if MINIX had a GPL license, Intel might not have used it since then it would have had to publish the modifications to the code. Maybe yes, maybe no, but the modifications were no doubt technical issues involving which mode processes run in, etc. My understanding, however, is that the small size and modular microkernel structure were the primary attractions. Many people (including me) don't like the idea of an all-powerful management engine in there at all (since it is a possible security hole and a dangerous idea in the first place), but that is Intel's business decision and a separate issue from the code it runs. A company as big as Intel could obviously write its own OS if it had to. My point is that big companies with lots of resources and expertise sometimes use microkernels, especially in embedded systems. The L4 microkernel has been running inside smartphone chips for years. I certainly hope Intel did thorough security hardening and testing before deploying the chip, since apparently an older version of MINIX was used. Older versions were primarily for education and newer ones were for high availability. Military-grade security was never a goal.</p> <p>Second note added later: The online discussion got completely sidetracked from my original points as noted above. For the record, I would like to state that when Intel contacted me, they didn't say what they were working on. Companies rarely talk about future products without NDAs. I figured it was a new Ethernet chip or graphics chip or something like that. If I had suspected they might be building a spy engine, I certainly wouldn't have cooperated, even though all they wanted was reducing the memory footprint (= chip area for them). I think creating George Orwell's 1984 is an extremely bad idea, even if Orwell was off by about 30 years. People should have complete control over their own computers, not Intel and not the government. In the U.S. the Fourth Amendment makes it very clear that the government is forbidden from searching anyone's property without a search warrant. Many other countries have privacy laws that are in the same spirit. Putting a possible spy in every computer is a terrible development.</p> </blockquote>
Custom assembler for CHIP-8. Contribute to Tackx/c8-ass development by creating an account on GitHub.
When you’re baking a cake, it’s hard to know when the inside is in the state you want it to be. The same is true—with much higher stakes—for microelectronic chips: How can engineers confirm that what’s inside has truly…
How I reverse engineered the iPod Classic's undocumented Mikey chip to get Apple's inline earphone remote working in Rockbox, 15 years into the port.
The AI boom has driven US chipmaker Nvidia’s supply chain emissions up by 725% since 2020, according to a new report by environmental and civil society groups.
If you missed the hubbub this week, it was discovered that the Raspberry Pi Foundation added code in the firmware that locks the boot process up if non-original RAM chips are detected onboard. Hot-…
AI drastically shortened its design time; it will only get faster
How I reverse engineered the iPod Classic's undocumented Mikey chip to get Apple's inline earphone remote working in Rockbox, 15 years into the port.
Montage Technology has begun mass production of its fifth-generation DDR5 Registering Clock Driver chip, or RCD05, for high-performance RDIMM memory
How I reverse engineered the iPod Classic's undocumented Mikey chip to get Apple's inline earphone remote working in Rockbox, 15 years into the port.
On the old iPods, generally referred to here in the future as iPod Classic, there lives a tiny, undocumented chip called Mikey. It sits at the headphone output and performs only two functions: powe…
16 channels of DDR5, 5 GHz clock speeds, and support for CXL 3.1 memory god boxes? What's not to like?
What if your wireless earbuds - or audio glasses - could stream high-quality lossless audio that doesn't cut out when you leave your phone on the bedside charger or buried in the couch? Qualcomm's new Snapdragon Sound Elite Gen 2 is its first to integrate "micro-power Wi-Fi 6E" right into the chip, so they can connect directly to your home Wi-Fi network, and from there to the cloud. If that sounds like a familiar promise, it's probably because Qualcomm promised something similar back in 2023 with the "S7 Pro sound platform" and its Expanded Personal Area Network (XPAN) tech, saying that Wi-Fi earbuds can do what Bluetooth alone cannot. Name … Read the full story at The Verge.