Re:British right to repair law excludes smartphones and comp...
by rockemsockem on Thursday July 01, 2021 @09:17PM
(#27706898)
Really though, if we're talking about "completely secure" computers, or even something approaching that, no one can be trusted to keep any system secure. So why not at least let users have some freedom while taking care of the most obvious exploit routes?
Re:British right to repair law excludes smartphones and comp...
by danuker on Friday July 02, 2021 @03:37AM
(#27708799)
Oh, can the best-in-business CPU manufacturers be trusted to keep their systems secure?
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectre_(security_vulnerabilit...
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meltdown_(security_vulnerabili...
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Management_Engine#Securi...
4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Platform_Security_Processo...
Re:British right to repair law excludes smartphones and comp...
by heavyset_go on Friday July 02, 2021 @02:18PM
(#27714893)
There have been exploits for ARM's TrustZone implementations, as well.
I think the last 30 years have shown that, in some sense, even competent computer users can’t really be trusted to keep their systems secure. I’m not saying that the only solution is to have a totally locked down system, but I’m also not saying that having an HSM is a bad thing.
I understand that the M1 Macs get improved security from the more iPhone-like architecture but that the system is still somewhat hackable (eg there is a possibility of running Linux). So it would appear that one can have one’s cake and eat it. I think hardware security modules are mostly orthogonal to having a hackable system and companies like apple must be persuaded somehow to leave systems openable through other means.
[1] https://ftp.gnu.org/old-gnu/Manuals/coreutils-4.5.4/html_nod...