The Die Is Cast: Hardware Security Is Not Assured

Re:The Die Is Cast: Hardware Security Is Not Assured by rmrfstar on Friday November 06, 2020 @06:59PM (#25012244)

It's worth noting that Apple and Amazon can't lie about their business without opening themselves up to potential criminal liability under securities laws. [1]

That means Apple and Amazon are more credible in this case, unless there is some super secret NatSec exception to securities law that we don't know about.

[1] Specifically, SEC Rule 14a-9 in conjunction with Section 32(a) of the Exchange Act.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Die Is Cast: Hardware Security Is Not Assured by roenxi on Saturday November 07, 2020 @12:21AM (#25013360)

> unless there is some super secret NatSec exception to securities law that we don't know about.

Did you not hear about the phonetapping business [0]? There is no way that a government-sponsored secret hardware backdoor would get any executives in trouble.

SEC rules are not a reasonable protection - or even consideration - when dealing with the US spying apparatus. If there was a hardware backdoor program:

(1) There would be a secret exemption to SEC rules.

(2) There would probably be a secret "we will end you" threat if the execs revealed details. Snowden & Assange would be mentioned.

(3) Even ignoring those two points, the rules would be ignored and changed later if there were any legal difficulties.

[0] https://www.cnet.com/news/senate-endorses-retroactive-fisa-i...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Die Is Cast: Hardware Security Is Not Assured by snypher on Friday November 06, 2020 @11:14PM (#25013183)

If it was true, would they disclose, even if they could? It's not a secret exemption, it's all in the law, Section 505 of the PATRIOT Act.

[ Parent | on HN ]