Articles> Problems

Hello and thank you for taking a few minutes to read this article.


In this article the exploitable problem areas of a computer/device BIOS are discussed.


Generation 1 BIOS

Typical example of old style Gen 1 BIOS:


Please note, most BIOS have an antivirus option to monitor for any deviations of unused slack space to prevent unwanted code (usually hackers) from taking advantage of this. A good example of such BIOS antivirus can be seen in action here.

My original C.U.P.I.D. Email design from 2001 sought to ultimately have code added to a OEM BIOS for means to use a given computers random hardware ID's in algorithms for encryption. As only a small community of BIOS programmers existed and even less investors who understood the objective, a easier software based solution was pursued.



The latest iteration of the BIOS, now known as UEFI, has many other features previously not available in a Gen 1 BIOS. Access to the network cards at this early stage being the most prominent. The following picture has a circled area which shows where current BIOS programmers can add their own companies unique branding and run any vendor-specific programs. A typical UEFI Setup program looks like this.


In the Commentary section of this website I explore the vulnerability of the Intel ME-AMT design. In short, Intel incorporates 'approved' slack space for its ME-AMT code, activated from the circled area of the above picture. The reason for putting their programming there and not in to the BIOS code itself is because it is proprietary and thus not able to be changed without Intel approval. The problem with this approach is - if Intel can do it others can too and it is only a matter of time before similar approaches are used. Currently, Intel has special requirements to unlock the full potential of their ME-AMT design. How long before a bad actor figures out how to exploit it? Because of its closed design it is ripe for exploitation. This is why a non-Intel Corp. solution is required. Enter C.U.P.I.D.


While not one to discuss what I suspect is classified information, the leaked information regarding the CIA installing code on the iPhone since 2008 appears to have used a very similar approach in the BIOS of those iPhones. Speculation - yes. Only way to survive a full system wipe? Yes. Limited in function? Personally I think so if for no other reason than the FBI required extraneous measures to crack a secure iPhone. With C.U.P.I.D. and a proper search warrant it would have been much simpler.

With C.U.P.I.D. being a choice, there will be those who do not use it. As the pool of people with it surpass those who do not, it will become far easier to focus resources on bad actors.

Whether it is a Intel ME-AMT hack, a BIOS slack-space exploit, or any of the other follow up rootkit/bootkits etc., the only way to catch any unwanted activity is to monitor every single bit of data as it passes through the computer/device. With that in place then proper antivirus definitions can be programmed as to what is and what is not allowed.

Second, we have any given operating system which is not capable of protecting against such deep rooted hacks as SMM. Design wise it is simply not possible. Microsoft may not like to think of this, given enough hacking, may render their occasional Operating System replacements vulnerable upon release.

In laymans terms, when C.U.P.I.D. Anti-Virus and Firewall rules are coded properly, will form a encapsulating shell within which all actions can be monitored so any undesired actions do not take place. The key here to detection is the unpatented portion which has been verified can be done and will -not be outlined in a public forum-.

Want to know how we do that? We have to build C.U.P.I.D.

Your move.







































What? Your still here? Why are you all the way down here? Well ok... as a bonus here is the song I had to refrain from using as background music. Hope you enjoy it.


Copyright 2017 @www.cupidtechnologies.com All Rights Reserved