3 ms·

- "apparent" - you don't know what they're doing about this on the inside. I doubt they're pretending there are no such issues and not working on it but their c

- "apparent" - you don't know what they're doing about this on the inside. I doubt they're pretending there are no such issues and not working on it but their closed nature does hurt their appearance in these kinds of situations. - a USB condom is not a solution, it only prevents power sources using data channels. Data devices, which you still might want to use occasionally, are even more likely to be compromised. Plus, it does nothing if the attacker has physical access to the machine.

leoc 11y ago
> a USB condom is not a solution, it only prevents power sources using data channels. Of course it is not a perfect solution, but (like a real condom) it is a partial solution to the infection problem that is effective and not very burdensome. Charging is a major mode of vulnerability to USB attacks, quite likely the single biggest. And compared to the big, multi-sided task of redesigning USB and the systems around it, providing a USB condom for charging is cheap and straightforward. > "apparent" - you don't know what they're doing about this on the inside. Yes, this is why I used that qualifier. However, for a variety of reasons it does not seem probable that they happen to be preparing a big push on this issue internally.