And again, this is not the main point I’m arguing. What I’m saying is that supposedly “this is something that’s enabled by default on consumer devices” is verifiably wrong.
And I was trying to address this point:
> Even then, every setup I’ve seen have AMT (a separate Ethernet interface) behind a firewall and is only accessible via local network.
In the past, manufacturers used that defense when a security researcher approached them about a problem and they justified the lack of patching by saying things like "nobody would put this on the Internet". There are simple things a manufacturer can do to encourage good security by the end-user (ex. showing a warning). I don't believe that blaming the end-user is a viable path to fixing the problem. This issue isn't specific to Intel but I would prefer it if the vendor implemented more security safeguards to prevent users from inadvertently increasing their attack surface.