4 ms·

> But I think that is an acceptable risk And I think it is unacceptable. That doesn't mean that you also have to think the same thing, but I would rather not

> But I think that is an acceptable risk And I think it is unacceptable. That doesn't mean that you also have to think the same thing, but I would rather not have that option taken away from me. I also don't think that you have made a case for any similar-security implementation for integrity protection. I think distributed trust is the only way to make trustworthy components, and the only known-good way to do that is using PKI, and the only proven way to do that is to have a CA. > [..] after all, you can never protect against [..] That's the kind of thinking that gets you stuck in "we have already lost so we should stop trying". If you can make sure that your finger print never leaves the secure enclave, and you can make sure that the Secure Enclave cannot be replaced, you can trust the device a whole lot more than a fake security measure that can be circumvented at every stage. What is the point of an insecure security control? You don't send your passwords plain-text over the internet, do you? Just because TLS is imperfect, and your CA store can be compromised, and your screen might be recorded using a camera and a telescope doesn't mean that therefore we should stop improving TLS...

smoldesu 4y ago
> And I think it is unacceptable. If you're uncomfortable with the idea of buying potentially backdoored hardware, what makes you comfortable using backdoored software? I don't understand the "hardware matters but software doesn't" threat model. It certainly doesn't benefit you in any pragmatic sense, the best it will do is give you warm fuzzies while Apple adds your OCSP data to a running tab for your iCloud account.
- oneplane 4y ago
  Because unless you go collect some sand and make your own wafers etc. you have to put some trust somewhere. I trust a relationship between me and a manufacturer of choice more than an adversary. Keep in mind that trust does not equal blind trust. I trust an Apple SoC and Apple SEP more than say, a RockChip SoC or a MediaTek SEP. And I trust a finger print reader that does not transmit actual fingerprints to the application processor more than a finger print reader that does. If you are really on the spectrum of 'trust nobody', then what are you doing here on the internet? You had to trust your GPU, your window manager, your browser, the network stack, your internet provider, the server this site runs on, the people who own it etc.

smoldesu 4y ago

> And I think it is unacceptable. If you're uncomfortable with the idea of buying potentially backdoored hardware, what makes you comfortable using backdoored software? I don't understand the "hardware matters but software doesn't" threat model. It certainly doesn't benefit you in any pragmatic sense, the best it will do is give you warm fuzzies while Apple adds your OCSP data to a running tab for your iCloud account.

oneplane 4y ago
Because unless you go collect some sand and make your own wafers etc. you have to put some trust somewhere. I trust a relationship between me and a manufacturer of choice more than an adversary. Keep in mind that trust does not equal blind trust. I trust an Apple SoC and Apple SEP more than say, a RockChip SoC or a MediaTek SEP. And I trust a finger print reader that does not transmit actual fingerprints to the application processor more than a finger print reader that does. If you are really on the spectrum of 'trust nobody', then what are you doing here on the internet? You had to trust your GPU, your window manager, your browser, the network stack, your internet provider, the server this site runs on, the people who own it etc.