3 ms·

A lot of software stacks are still only optimised for ARM. TrustZone is also far more mature and supported than the RISC-V equivalents.

• bfrog 2y ago
  Is TrustZone really all that useful? I haven't had a need for anything like it myself! esp-c6 module parts are like $2-3 and already have an fcc cert, low power, and support all the same protocols I believe. Are nrf54 modules really that cheap? Can I program them natively with Rust yet?
  • jdietrich 2y ago
    If you care at all about security, then yes, it is tremendously useful.
    • bfrog 2y ago
      Care about security in what way? The radio and protocols are all written in C still with the endless CVEs that bring about aren’t they?
• explodingwaffle 2y ago
  What would you consider the “RISC-V equivalent” of TrustZone? Last time I was curious I didn’t find anything. (FWIW I agree with the other commenter that these ""security"" features are useless, and feel to me more like check-box compliance than anything else (Why does TrustZone work with function calls? What’s wrong with IPC! Also, what’s wrong with privileged mode?). Just seems like a bit of a waste of silicon really.)
  • IshKebab 2y ago
    There are some examples listed here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_execution_environment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_execution_environment
  • jdietrich 2y ago
    MultiZone, OpenMZ, Keystone, maybe Penglai or ProvenCore, I can't really keep up. That answer goes a long way to explaining the appeal of TrustZone.