News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Debugging mechanism in Intel CPUs allows seizing control ... by pmontra on Tuesday January 10, 2017 @04:21AM (#13363664)
Leaving physical access to a PC is bad practice in any case. It makes it easy for thieves to steal it and to anybody to implant any kind of device or sw. Intel increased the surface area for attacks and this can't be good. However security for everyone regardless of the threat model is hard. I make an example with smartphones.

Unlock with PIN or with fingerprint? Obviously PIN is safer because we leave fingerprints everywhere. But threat modeling comes into play.

I know of a guy who got his iPhone stolen at a party and started receiving email notifications of account changes. Did the thief use NSA grade decryption techniques? No, the phone was protected with a PIN. The thief likely kept an eye on people unlocking phones and stole the one he was able to spot the PIN for. The inferior security method (fingerprint) would have prevented unlocking the phone and maybe made the theft less interesting.

It's always a tradeoff and one has to decide who's wanting to protect against.

Re:Debugging mechanism in Intel CPUs allows seizing control ... by KirinDave on Tuesday January 10, 2017 @02:18PM (#13367977)
> Leaving physical access to a PC is bad practice in any case.

Okay, so imagine you're in a country where homosexuality is illegal, but you still are trying to live your life as a human (the majority of which seek companionship).

"Oh sorry, not only are you ruined when they kick down your door, but everyone you've ever networked with is at risk now too maybe try not living there ha ha goodbye!" is not a story.

What's more, I just want to point out Apple and Google have been trying very hard to make devices which all but the most resourced individuals cannot break. As you implied, some access weaknesses exist to this day, but right now for desktops and laptops this "welp I guess you deserved this because you weren't careful" attitude seems to rule the discourse.

It's shortsighted, it's regressive, it's unhelpful. And while I cannot know your motivations, I know many folks who are so paranoid that Intel and AMD might have backdoors in their boot integrity verifiers that they're willing to ignore people desperate to keep secrets on that principle rather than try and make an actual best effort at security.

Re:Debugging mechanism in Intel CPUs allows seizing control ... by pmontra on Wednesday January 11, 2017 @06:39AM (#13373231)
I'm surprised by what you read in my message. I'm not the "you deserved it" kind of person. People has the right to live how they decide to live and deserve nothing bad happen to them. However prudence calls to plan for security and I just don't believe technology can help us past to a certain point.

I lock the door of my house. Most people do. That helps against burglars, which is my threat model. It doesn't help against police with a warrant in some countries, maybe warrantless in others. If somebody wants your data so badly to kick down your door, maybe they are willing to use workarounds even less pleasant than https://xkcd.com/538/ There are techniques against that, compartmentation (is that the right word?) and others. The more farsighted is trying to change how a country works. Long and risky though.

Re:Debugging mechanism in Intel CPUs allows seizing control ... by KirinDave on Thursday January 12, 2017 @02:03PM (#13385078)
Technology can play a part at every stage of this. For better or for worse.