Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Yeah. Compare how this article describes its anonymous sources with the Bloomberg one. It makes it clear that their sources were directly involved in investigating the claims Bloomberg made - including a "senior security engineer directly involved in Apple’s internal investigation" - and that their claims were based on that internal investigation. The Bloomberg article just refers vaguely to "senior insiders" who knew about Apple finding malicious chips on Supermicro motherboards... somehow.


Given enough information about an anonymous source, you can figure out how they are. Keeping it as senior insiders is a way to protect the individuals.

The question you have to ask yourself is whether you trust Bloomberg or not. If you trust them, then you trust that they did their due diligence. if you don't trust them, then nothing presented by them will get you to trust them.

I swear, it's like people don't know how investigative journalism works. Anonymous sources aren't anonymous to the journalists.

As for the companies denying this, this wouldn't be the first time they've lied in such a manner.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: