4 ms·
Since wait/sleep are not CPU intensive does not it open the door for a "power consumption" attack? Plus, using interruption/clock is not very stealth: it implie
by julie1 11y ago
Since wait/sleep are not CPU intensive does not it open the door for a "power consumption" attack?
Plus, using interruption/clock is not very stealth: it implies switching context, sending signal to a clock, and waiting for a specific interrupt to wake you up (plus reloading context ....).
I guess as usual that during heavy load it may backfire on some hardware by changing its behaviour when there is a pressure to access the clock enabling a potential DOS (on some hardware like heavily asynchronuous equipment like routers for instance, I totally can feel the CPU overload while there is almost no process, IO that requires close to RT beginning to fail unexpectedly, clock drift...).
I mean you don't need a PhD to anticipate this.
It seems a totally elegant, simple and wrong solution to me.
- loser777 11y agoPower consumption is assumed to not be part of their threat model. >Similarly, we assume that the attacker >does not have physical access to the hardware and cannot >monitor side channels such as electromagnetic radiations, >power use, or acoustic emanations.