Re:Espressif's ESP32-C5 Is Now in Mass Production
by KeplerBoy on Thursday May 01, 2025 @02:02AM
(#43854175)
Yes, it's one thing to prevent others from reading the flash, but I don't see the value in preventing reflashing it.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Espressif's ESP32-C5 Is Now in Mass Production
by overfeed on Thursday May 01, 2025 @03:02AM
(#43854504)
It counters evil maid attacks.
Re:Espressif's ESP32-C5 Is Now in Mass Production
by echoangle on Thursday May 01, 2025 @03:25AM
(#43854648)
Not really, if the evil maid is sophisticated enough to bring their own firmware to reflash your devices, they could also just swap the PCB containing the controller or solder in a new chip
Re:Espressif's ESP32-C5 Is Now in Mass Production
by overfeed on Thursday May 01, 2025 @03:33AM
(#43854685)
I chose the word counters rather than eliminate for the reason you outlined.
If you're the vendor, you can add a tamper-resistant or tamper-evident design to raise the cost of ,component-replacement attacks. Which can be countered by whole-device replacement, which in turn is countered by device identity attestation, amd so on, in an endless arms-race.
Re:Espressif's ESP32-C5 Is Now in Mass Production
by franga2000 on Thursday May 01, 2025 @04:57AM
(#43855177)
Tamper-evident stuff and device attestation solve all these problems even without preventing reflashing. If you can't check if the device has been tampered with or replaced, preventing flashing won't help. If you can, you don't need to.