←back to thread

Intel OEM Private Key Leak: A Blow to UEFI Secure Boot Security

(securityonline.info)
658 points transpute | 5 comments | 06 May 23 17:39 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
yarg ◴[06 May 23 18:50 UTC] No.35844230[source]▶
Unless and until we get to efficient homomorphic compute, these measures will only ever be security via obscurity.
replies(1): >>35844248 #
bawolff ◴[06 May 23 18:51 UTC] No.35844248[source]▶
I don't see how homomorphic encryption is particularly applicable to secureboot.
replies(1): >>35844352 #
yarg ◴[06 May 23 19:02 UTC] No.35844352[source]▶
You want to be able to deploy and execute code outside the control of whoever physically controls the machine.

Either you implement it with security features hidden from the device holder, in which case it will always be broken eventually, or you guarantee the capabilities with mathematics - in which case a security break cannot happen even if the physical machine's description is completely public.

There are certainly layers to this that I'm missing, but I think homomorphic compute is the only unbreakable answer to secure compute in general.

replies(3): >>35844481 #>>35844523 #>>35845166 #
btilly ◴[06 May 23 19:19 UTC] No.35844523[source]▶
I do not want malware authors to be able to run code on my machine outside of my control. That prevents me from knowing whether it is installed, what it is doing, or to have a way to get rid of it.

Holomorphic encryption allows someone's interests to be secured. But I'm dubious that I'm the one who will actually benefit here.

replies(1): >>35844686 #
1. yarg ◴[06 May 23 19:36 UTC] No.35844686[source]▶
Then don't run code from untrusted sources.

This also has major implications for cloud compute.

replies(1): >>35845122 #
2. btilly ◴[06 May 23 20:31 UTC] No.35845122[source]▶
That's not a realistic answer.

Do you have any idea how much software is on the average consumer device, and how poorly equipped the average consumer is to determine its provenance let alone decide what is trustworthy?

Not to mention that there are economic reasons to run untrusted software. For example no matter how little I trust Zoom and Slack, I don't have a job if I am not willing to run them.

replies(2): >>35845486 #>>35846143 #
3. Sunspark ◴[06 May 23 21:25 UTC] No.35845486[source]▶
I like the approach of having a dedicated PC and phone that is permitted to be riddled with remote-management and malware and used only for those purposes, and my own devices completely separate.
replies(1): >>35846157 #
4. bawolff ◴[06 May 23 23:01 UTC] No.35846143[source]▶
Sure, but homomorphic encryption doesn't really change anything on that front.

Maybe it might in theory make it much harder to audit, but its not like you are auditing all that code right now.

5. btilly ◴[06 May 23 23:02 UTC] No.35846157{3}[source]▶
I liked that approach until I realized that devices are replaceable, people aren't.

If my kids want to play a game wirh me, I'll install the game. A pristine device that I can't use to further my values is worthless to me.