Before anyone gets too excited, this provides a 0.5% reduction in processing power: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Google-PSP-Security-Prot

Before anyone gets too excited, this provides a 0.5% reduction in processing power: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Google-PSP-Security-Protocol https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Google-P... The number of organizations that this is relevant for is very, very small. For most organizations, buying slightly more hardware is likely going to make far more sense than the amount of engineering effort required to implement something like this, if only because it's a much simpler, safer bet. It's a little unfortunate that they chose a name that was already proposed as a L2 encryption method, Packet Security Protocol (one of the first hits I got when I tried searching for any analysis or prior discussion): https://scholarworks.rit.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=9388&context=theses https://scholarworks.rit.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=938...