5 ms·

Older BIOSes are much simpler, and also offer no security boundary at all - nobody talks about BIOS vulnerabilities because it wouldn't give you anything you do

• peter_d_sherman 2y ago
  It may be argued that a Ford Model-T (one of the earliest and probably the simplest of all mass-produced vehicles in the early 20th Century: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Model_T https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Model_T ) had no "security boundary" at all, and that conversely, the most modern vehicle with the latest radio frequency based remote lock and key (aka "Smart Key") -- is more "secure" (has more of a "security boundary")... ...but if so, is that asserted "security boundary" really an actual security boundary(?) If the security boundary or "security boundary" -- is opaque in how it functions; if it is a "black box": (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_box); https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_box); if no one (other than potentially a few people who work for the manufacturer, or exist at the company subcontracting to build their Smart Key component (if the Smart Key is subcontracted/outsourced)) understands exactly how it works, then is it really "secure"? (If so, then that sounds eerily similar to the "obscurity is good" (aka "transparency bad") side of the "Security Through Obscurity" debate that the Internet had, like 5, 10, 20+ years ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_through_obscurity#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_through_obscurity#Cri...) Why not read the following: "Gone in 20 seconds: how ‘smart keys’ have fuelled a new wave of car crime": https://www.theguardian.com/money/2024/feb/24/smart-keys-car-crime-thieves-hi-tech-arms-race https://www.theguardian.com/money/2024/feb/24/smart-keys-car... And you tell me? My conclusion: Perhaps less "security" (less of an asserted "security boundary") -- is actually more actual security -- at least in some cases -- at least in the case of the Ford Model-T...