2 ms·
I also read the article, and did look at the linked projects, and it's not clear to me how they solve GP's issue, because the company is still providing these s
by danShumway 7y ago
I also read the article, and did look at the linked projects, and it's not clear to me how they solve GP's issue, because the company is still providing these solutions precompiled on hardware they control.
How does GP know that everything is actually being provided unmodified, without any backdoors?
> it helps a lot rather than broadcasting every nascent thought that pops up in the head to the internet.
I don't think this is helpful, it's unnecessarily antagonistic and dismissive.
GP's point seems reasonable to me; I don't see anything here that means that the Thinkpad x230 couldn't be modified before installation/paring, or that the tools themselves couldn't be modified before the laptop was shipped. If there is a reason to trust the initial build process, the linked page isn't explaining what it is.
- bubblethink 7y ago>How does GP know that everything is actually being provided unmodified, without any backdoors? They don't need to. That is precisely the point. The entire software stack is open source and reproducible (except a few KBs of Intel ME). As a press release, the linked post is brief. If you wish to read more on the technical aspects, here are all the constituent projects: https://coreboot.org/ https://coreboot.org/ https://github.com/osresearch/heads/ https://github.com/osresearch/heads/ https://github.com/corna/me_cleaner https://github.com/corna/me_cleaner https://github.com/nitrokey https://github.com/nitrokey A good talk if you prefer video: https://media.ccc.de/v/33c3-8314-bootstraping_a_slightly_more_secure_laptop https://media.ccc.de/v/33c3-8314-bootstraping_a_slightly_mor...
- andy_ppp 7y agoOkay this is interesting then, thanks for informing us better about what this all means and why we don't 100% have to trust the OEM of this hardware.