3 ms·

TPM 2.0 is a fantastic spec. There's little that's wrong with it. Even the bus sniffing vulnerabilities w/ dTPMs aren't TPM's fault but the BMC's and BIOS', a

TPM 2.0 is a fantastic spec. There's little that's wrong with it. Even the bus sniffing vulnerabilities w/ dTPMs aren't TPM's fault but the BMC's and BIOS', as there is absolutely a way to encrypt and authenticate secrets to/from the TPM. Reinventing this wheel will probably lose a lot of good things. People who reinvent wheels often fail to understand what came before.

flangola7 4y ago
Encrypting bus traffic? What kind of mission impossible spy is this supposed to protect from?
- astrange 4y ago
  That's how console jailbreak mods have worked in the past. The important keyword is authenticated though. If it's not authenticated you can corrupt it.
  - flangola7 4y ago
    They're doing all this to prevent... console jailbreaks? I would have expected some kind of national security use case.
    - astrange 4y ago
      National security information is usually in a better protected environment than a game console or your laptop.
- cryptonector 4y ago
  The passive attacks on dTPMs in question require physical access, and opening the computer (and can be defeated with software). That is a pretty unlikely event for most users' computers. Active attacks (which can also be defeated with software) are more interesting because those are more likely, since the user doesn't have to cooperate with the attacker in those attacks.