3 ms·

Hack the tabulating machines. So much easier and they are the only ones that humans actually look at.

by sroussey 4y ago

walterbell 4y ago
Why not both?
- thrashh 4y ago
  Cuz ultimately everything costs some money to do (and even your own time is money) and we’re all trying to do the most possible with the least amount of money
  - walterbell 4y ago
    If an attacker already has sunk costs in successfully compromising both in a different market, then both isn't a new cost, it's two new markets. As for "why both", see recent attempts to audit electronic voting systems.
- Brian_K_White 4y ago
  Because you can't cause the cpu's microcode to be updated with your hacked code by magic, and what you can do with a hacked cpu directly, and without being instantly oticed, is actually pretty limited. The way you'd get use out of it would be for some tiny single bit flip or extra op change in the cpus behavior to invoke some other larger thing, like run an execurable that wouldn't otherwise have been run, or make a region of memory readable or writable that wouldn't normally, or allow an instruction that wouldn't normally etc.., and in all of those cases you need something else installed and ready to make use of the cpu hack. But if you can arrange to insert that other stuff, then the job is already done and playing with something exotic like this is just stupid. If you have the means to use this, then you already have the means to do 500 other simpler and more useful things. It's like replacing the locks on someone's car so that you can make your own key work in it too. Sure, cool, but you already stole their entire car or at least had access to it in the shop, and could just copy their normal key if you want access again later, for much cheaper, in much less time, and much less risk of detection.
  - walterbell 4y ago
    Exploitation of an existing bugdoor is statistically more likely than a backdoor, and does not require updating any microcode. Once identified and exploited, bugs may be removed in a future microcode revision, as with all other forms of firmware and software.

Hack the tabulating machines. So much easier and they are the only ones that humans actually look at.

walterbell 4y ago

Why not both?

thrashh 4y ago
Cuz ultimately everything costs some money to do (and even your own time is money) and we’re all trying to do the most possible with the least amount of money
- walterbell 4y ago
  If an attacker already has sunk costs in successfully compromising both in a different market, then both isn't a new cost, it's two new markets. As for "why both", see recent attempts to audit electronic voting systems.
Brian_K_White 4y ago
Because you can't cause the cpu's microcode to be updated with your hacked code by magic, and what you can do with a hacked cpu directly, and without being instantly oticed, is actually pretty limited. The way you'd get use out of it would be for some tiny single bit flip or extra op change in the cpus behavior to invoke some other larger thing, like run an execurable that wouldn't otherwise have been run, or make a region of memory readable or writable that wouldn't normally, or allow an instruction that wouldn't normally etc.., and in all of those cases you need something else installed and ready to make use of the cpu hack. But if you can arrange to insert that other stuff, then the job is already done and playing with something exotic like this is just stupid. If you have the means to use this, then you already have the means to do 500 other simpler and more useful things. It's like replacing the locks on someone's car so that you can make your own key work in it too. Sure, cool, but you already stole their entire car or at least had access to it in the shop, and could just copy their normal key if you want access again later, for much cheaper, in much less time, and much less risk of detection.
- walterbell 4y ago
  Exploitation of an existing bugdoor is statistically more likely than a backdoor, and does not require updating any microcode. Once identified and exploited, bugs may be removed in a future microcode revision, as with all other forms of firmware and software.