3 ms·

I can't even remotely see that energy efficiency of crypto is a real problem in IoT security and that adding another chip would solve anything. Most problems i

by hannob 9y ago

I can't even remotely see that energy efficiency of crypto is a real problem in IoT security and that adding another chip would solve anything. Most problems in IoT security can be reduced to "nobody cares". If vendors can't be bothered to stop using default passwords, how are you gonna convince them that they add an extra chip to have more performant crypto? (Which almost certainly they'll use wrong anyway.)

John_KZ 9y ago
That's no longer the problem. IoT manufacturers now worry about security, because they want exclusive ownership of your data and nobody turning their fridge cameras to a massive botnet (and PR hit). Encrypting all their traffic with device-specific and difficult to recover, hardware-based keys, will help them keep their devices safe. It's not a bad thing actually.
TickleSteve 9y ago
There certainly are use-cases for this device. The one I'm intimately familiar with is in smart-metering with gas-meters. These things a battery powered and need to last for ~20 years on that battery. Simultaneously, they're dealing with financial data and communication, therefore all communications are encrypted & authenticated. This device, although may be expensive tho... when you're dealing with 10's of millions of units, that cost really counts. Hopefully someone (ARM) will snap start embedding this type of device within the Cortex-M range... (yes, I know, there already is crypto-acceleration, but more is better).