←back to thread

Memory Integrity Enforcement

(security.apple.com)
458 points circuit | 4 comments | 09 Sep 25 18:25 UTC | HN request time: 0.204s | source
Show context
gjsman-1000 ◴[09 Sep 25 19:16 UTC] No.45187272[source]▶
I think hackers are not ready for the idea that unhackable hardware might actually be here. Hardware that will never have an exploit found someday, never be jailbroken, never have piracy, outside of maybe nation-state attacks.

Xbox One, 2012? Never hacked.

Nintendo Switch 2, 2025? According to reverse engineers... flawlessly secure microkernel and secure monitor built over the Switch 1 generation. Meanwhile NVIDIA's boot code is formally verified this time, written in the same language (ADA SPARK) used for nuclear reactors and airplanes, on a custom RISC-V chip.

iPhone? iOS 17 and 18 have never been jailbroken; now we introduce MIE.

replies(8): >>45187602 #>>45187884 #>>45188108 #>>45188283 #>>45188320 #>>45188444 #>>45190700 #>>45198883 #
1. Avamander ◴[09 Sep 25 19:37 UTC] No.45187602[source]▶
Saying "never" is too bold. But it's definitely getting immensely difficult.

There are still plenty of other flaws besides memory unsafety to exploit. I doubt that we'll see like a formally proven mainstream OS for a long time.

replies(2): >>45188208 #>>45191178 #
2. wbl ◴[09 Sep 25 20:15 UTC] No.45188208[source]▶
Those flaws get harder the more restricted devices are.
replies(1): >>45189870 #
3. bigyabai ◴[09 Sep 25 21:59 UTC] No.45189870[source]▶
Depends. If "restriction" means "complexity" then you may end up with scenarios like the BlastDoor vulns (eg. FORCEDENTRY).
4. MBCook ◴[09 Sep 25 23:51 UTC] No.45191178[source]▶
True. But if developing an exploit takes 15 years and the average life of the device is five then to some degree that is effectively perfect.