5 ms·

> None of these use cases or security benefits require taking power away from the sysadmin. Yes, they do! That's the whole point of the product. Why would you

by qayxc 6y ago

> None of these use cases or security benefits require taking power away from the sysadmin. Yes, they do! That's the whole point of the product. Why would you even trust the sysadmin in the first place? The fact of the matter is that a lot of data leaks have been caused by insiders - either willingly or via social engineering. This technology provides a method of closing this loophole and aims to enable users (not private people) to have a secure domain that not even someone with physical access to the system and all administrative privileges has access to. Whether it works as advertised is another story of course, but the gist of it is that no one is to be trusted; especially not the sysadmin. > With the obvious note that lots of home users are their own sysadmins. Again - this is not primarily targeted at home users. Plus the vast majority of home users don't even know what administrating a system even means. And TBH - why should they? "It just works!" has been a very successful mantra for this one company what sells iPods and such... This might be hard to grasp for some greybeards, but hardware security by design is worth more than security cameras, NDAs, background checks and good work ethics. > But if I'm forced to give someone else special beyond-root access to my device for DRM purposes, that's not acceptable. And that's fine and you are free to not use these products then because they're not made for you anyway. This is not consumer level hardware (at least not yet).

anfilt 6y ago
Its fine to say dont buy such hardware. The concern is what happens if thats all AMD, Intel and qualcomm sell to people. Apple already does this with the iPhones and tablets, and unless you find a bootrom exploit good luck running an other OS on the device. You also start running into problems where more software and content may require such hardware.
- qayxc 6y ago
  > Apple already does this with the iPhones and tablets, and unless you find a bootrom exploit good luck running an other OS on the device. These devices are not general computing devices (according to Apple), so in their mind that's fine. It also makes no difference to the customer since alternatives exist. The fact that pretty much all other products in the smartphone and tablet market are inferior in terms of hardware, quality and software doesn't matter. > You also start running into problems where more software and content may require such hardware. So? If anything, this opens a market for software and hardware that doesn't require it, don't you think? For every Steam and Epic Game Store there's a Good Old Games [1] is what I'm saying. Just another great reason to support and use FOSS, no? [1] https://www.gog.com https://www.gog.com
  - xg15 6y ago
    > These devices are not general computing devices (according to Apple), so in their mind that's fine. It also makes no difference to the customer since alternatives exist. Yeah, well, if that's all it takes, then we'll probably not have any more "general computing devices" being sold in a few years. (Where did I hear that before?)
brandonr49 6y ago
This argument of "trust no one, not even the sysadmin you employ" is actually "trust no one except me and this black box I'd like to sell you". Even ignoring the externalities of this kind of push I don't really see the value.
xg15 6y ago
> This technology provides a method of closing this loophole and aims to enable users (not private people) to have a secure domain that not even someone with physical access to the system and all administrative privileges has access to. Whether it works as advertised is another story of course, but the gist of it is that no one is to be trusted; especially not the sysadmin. Who exactly is the user in this scenario? Who exactly sets the rules that the pluton architecture should enforce here? > And that's fine and you are free to not use these products then because they're not made for you anyway. This is not consumer level hardware (at least not yet). I don't understand why you are so sure about this not being intended for consumer-level hardware. There are plenty of scenarios where locking consumers out of their own devices would be highly desireable from a business perspective - DRM being only one of them.

by qayxc 6y ago

anfilt 6y ago

Its fine to say dont buy such hardware. The concern is what happens if thats all AMD, Intel and qualcomm sell to people. Apple already does this with the iPhones and tablets, and unless you find a bootrom exploit good luck running an other OS on the device. You also start running into problems where more software and content may require such hardware.

qayxc 6y ago
> Apple already does this with the iPhones and tablets, and unless you find a bootrom exploit good luck running an other OS on the device. These devices are not general computing devices (according to Apple), so in their mind that's fine. It also makes no difference to the customer since alternatives exist. The fact that pretty much all other products in the smartphone and tablet market are inferior in terms of hardware, quality and software doesn't matter. > You also start running into problems where more software and content may require such hardware. So? If anything, this opens a market for software and hardware that doesn't require it, don't you think? For every Steam and Epic Game Store there's a Good Old Games [1] is what I'm saying. Just another great reason to support and use FOSS, no? [1] https://www.gog.com https://www.gog.com
- xg15 6y ago
  > These devices are not general computing devices (according to Apple), so in their mind that's fine. It also makes no difference to the customer since alternatives exist. Yeah, well, if that's all it takes, then we'll probably not have any more "general computing devices" being sold in a few years. (Where did I hear that before?)

brandonr49 6y ago

This argument of "trust no one, not even the sysadmin you employ" is actually "trust no one except me and this black box I'd like to sell you". Even ignoring the externalities of this kind of push I don't really see the value.

xg15 6y ago

> This technology provides a method of closing this loophole and aims to enable users (not private people) to have a secure domain that not even someone with physical access to the system and all administrative privileges has access to. Whether it works as advertised is another story of course, but the gist of it is that no one is to be trusted; especially not the sysadmin. Who exactly is the user in this scenario? Who exactly sets the rules that the pluton architecture should enforce here? > And that's fine and you are free to not use these products then because they're not made for you anyway. This is not consumer level hardware (at least not yet). I don't understand why you are so sure about this not being intended for consumer-level hardware. There are plenty of scenarios where locking consumers out of their own devices would be highly desireable from a business perspective - DRM being only one of them.