4 ms·

What I'm saying is it's not interesting research. It's not advancing science. I can stare at any given computer system, and come up with most of this guy's idea

What I'm saying is it's not interesting research. It's not advancing science. I can stare at any given computer system, and come up with most of this guy's ideas in a few minutes, and implement them in a short time. It's extremely low effort. The papers aren't even good - his power leak paper uses a SparkFun current transformer connected to the audio line-in of a computer (doesn't get much lower tech than that) as a receiver, and made no attempt to actually trace the path the leaking signal takes, or use proper analysis equipment. I think he's wrong when he seems to imply it's a power consumption signal surviving backwards through the PSU (due to filtering); I think it's just EMI coupling across it to the power lines (he didn't analyze any of this, all he did was see the signal on the other end and everything about how it got there is an assumption presented as fact). If he'd at least implement some clever modulations then the papers would at least have value in researching how to cram more data into lossy side channels, but he's not doing that. All his modulations are textbook radio/modulation 101 stuff with very conservative parameters and no attempt to explore the actual theoretical limits of the channel bandwidth.

3pt14159 6y ago
I also agree. I actually literally had this thought yesterday walking down the street and I'm far from a low level security researcher. Row hammer[0] is a real attack worth actual money to thousands of entities. This attack is literally one of the simplest imaginable and any computer that it would apply to would already have shielding. Had it gained true wifi access then yes, maybe worth a tiny amount of money if it were faster for the like 12 computers in an office whose sole protection is some snipped wires on an ethernet cable and incoming data on UDP. For any real actor that has to worry about this type of attack they already employ all sorts of measures to defeat it, including actual bunkers underground with a secret entrance in the cow fields. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Row_hammer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Row_hammer
unnah 6y ago
I would still say that performing the demonstrations does have value and real-world impact. In particular: If you're planning a secure facility and considering whether to invest in e.g. temperature isolation, you can point out to the published demonstration as a justification for the expense. If there was no actual real-world demonstration in the public literature, someone could argue that the attack is purely theoretical, or that it would require so much resources that no one would bother, etc. In this sense, it is even better that it is a minimal-effort demonstration, which you don't need that much expertise to pull off. There have been many funded research projects with lot less impact...
antegamisou 6y ago
> it's not interesting research. It's not advancing science. What is research-worthy in computer security in your opinion? Feel free to list any papers from well-known conferences/journals.
- marcan_42 6y ago
  Things like cryptanalysis of modern deployed crypto/hash algorithms, attacks like rowhammer, etc. are certainly advancing the field.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]

3pt14159 6y ago

I also agree. I actually literally had this thought yesterday walking down the street and I'm far from a low level security researcher. Row hammer[0] is a real attack worth actual money to thousands of entities. This attack is literally one of the simplest imaginable and any computer that it would apply to would already have shielding. Had it gained true wifi access then yes, maybe worth a tiny amount of money if it were faster for the like 12 computers in an office whose sole protection is some snipped wires on an ethernet cable and incoming data on UDP. For any real actor that has to worry about this type of attack they already employ all sorts of measures to defeat it, including actual bunkers underground with a secret entrance in the cow fields. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Row_hammer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Row_hammer

unnah 6y ago

I would still say that performing the demonstrations does have value and real-world impact. In particular: If you're planning a secure facility and considering whether to invest in e.g. temperature isolation, you can point out to the published demonstration as a justification for the expense. If there was no actual real-world demonstration in the public literature, someone could argue that the attack is purely theoretical, or that it would require so much resources that no one would bother, etc. In this sense, it is even better that it is a minimal-effort demonstration, which you don't need that much expertise to pull off. There have been many funded research projects with lot less impact...

antegamisou 6y ago

> it's not interesting research. It's not advancing science. What is research-worthy in computer security in your opinion? Feel free to list any papers from well-known conferences/journals.

marcan_42 6y ago
Things like cryptanalysis of modern deployed crypto/hash algorithms, attacks like rowhammer, etc. are certainly advancing the field.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]