3 ms·
AFAIK, Reflections on trust supposes a compromised compiler. I do not see how a compiler whose source code is compromised can be compiled with the described ste
by marcodiego 5y ago
AFAIK, Reflections on trust supposes a compromised compiler. I do not see how a compiler whose source code is compromised can be compiled with the described steps. At least its hash would not match.
- IncRnd 5y agoThat's not the case. From Reflections: MORAL The moral is obvious. You can't trust code that you did not totally create yourself. (Especially code from companies that employ people like me.) No amount of source-level verification or scrutiny will protect you from using untrusted code. In demonstrating the possibility of this kind of attack, I picked on the C compiler. I could have picked on any program-handling program such as an assembler, a loader, or even hardware microcode. As the level of program gets lower, these bugs will be harder and harder to detect. A well-installed microcode bug will be almost impossible to detect.
- marcodiego 5y agoThat is the point: trust can be reduced to hardware (considering microcode as hardware). Which is much better than hardware and packagers and tools used by packagers.