Hacker News Reader

Comment by EwanToo | Hacker News Reader

Amazon are going all out on the denial

https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/setting-the-record-str...

Yeah, I mean that's what I would say too if some government intelligence agency told me I cannot say a word about this and have to deny it vehemently! haha :)

There's definitely something afoot. Bloomberg probably wouldn't have gone forward with just an in-depth piece referencing so many major tech companies unless it had substance. But generally even when legally compelled, companies tend to prefer silence or curt denials over lengthy detailed contrary pieces.

Is there a federal investigation going on into some sort of sabotage by the Chinese government? Possibly, and if so, there's a lot of reason these companies could even be willingly participating in covering it up. All of them benefit from the investigation being uninterrupted, and nobody needs the bad press.

Could the story be, in fact, fabricated? Sure. Russian trolls have seen to sowing discord in far more than just our election. They stoked drama about The Last Jedi even, as recently claimed. Is it possible they're seeing if they can get a major news outlet to publish something with absolutely no basis in fact? Maybe.

There's a lot of interesting possible angles here, but with the number of large public companies involved, this morning is probably the start of this drama, not the end of it.

I think it is a win-win for Apple and Amazon to spin it this way. They get to deny that they were compromised, and if that gets disproved they can easily say they were cooperating with national security operations and get away without any damage.

...they do? Why?

Apple is very strongly denying it as well

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-10-04/the-big-h...

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied.

These are such detailed denials that it's hard to believe the companies are lying.

hard to believe the companies are knowingly lying.

If you're working with the feds on a national security incident, and the PR department comes round because some reporters were asking about it, the correct answer is "I don't know what you're talking about."

What is more telling for me is that Apple has cut off all contracts with the company involved and will have nothing more to do with them - despite their denial.

They cut off contact for a separate reason - 2000 (IIRC) supermicro boards which did have issues.

If they wanted to cut ties for a different reason, execs could have just said "find a problem with some supermicro boards, no matter how much it costs to do so, and never repeat this conversation". They are complicated human-designed and -made artifacts; of course some problem exists. This is known in other situations as "parallel construction".

Frankly, I trust Bloomberg more than Amazon and Apple's PR departments combined.

You trust anonymous sources, over a company that is willing to back their claims?

However Apple or Amazon didn't back up their claims. If Bloomberg published an article of this magnitude which could be demonstrably disproved, it'd kill Newsweek's reputation.

More importantly, think of what would be Bloomberg's reasons to publish a false story versus Amazon and Apple's reason to deny a true story.

Of course. Apple/Amazon can be coerced into denying this (via government requests or otherwise). Bloomberg can't, nor is there any advantage for them to publish false information.

> nor is there any advantage for them to publish false information.

of course there is. It's called ad revenue and page views, both of which they're raking in today with these allegations. This story is all over the place. I don't trust Bloomberg with anything Apple at all and haven't for years now.

Here is one motivation for false information. Financial gain. Someone could have made a lot of money with put options.

Yes, this too. Some of the Bloomberg and WSJ "leaks" feel like their primary motive has been subtle stock manipulation. In particular, the "demand is slowing for $PRODUCT" articles that we continue to see.

Apple’s denial was quite strong as well, though brief. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the Bloomberg article retracted someday.

Investors don't seem to care, stock has slid over 2% today and it's still going down.

I wouldn't read too much into it. Stocks in general are down today, as bond yields go up.

Even if a national security letter wouldn't compel Apple or Amazon to lie, couldn't it compel the security team not to inform the executives or lawyers? Or at least this is an argument that's been going on for a while, can't remember if that issue has been settled.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com