Conversation

Every ARM SoC is proprietary, closed hardware. Same applies to most other hardware components like Wi-Fi / NFC / cellular radios, touchscreens, cameras and even batteries. There is nothing open about it, and not shipping the firmware updates just exposes users to vulnerabilities.
2
36
Replying to
There's a lot of work by others on improving isolation for these components and reducing exposed attack surface. I'm not particularly focused on security in this thread but rather frustration with projects falsely pretending to be open hardware or provide better privacy/security.
1
3
Replying to and
I don't understand how people can get away with presenting completely proprietary hardware / firmware as open. I'm sure it's even more frustrating for people doing the hard work of making actual open hardware, especially those trying to match current privacy/security properties.
1
6
Replying to
Absolutely. I share your frustration with misrepresentation of ARM SoCs as open, just not your enthusiasm for allowing post-shipping black box code in to replace one set of vulns with another, possibly-intentional set.
1
Replying to
It's not really a black box when it's not obfuscated and can be disassembled. The firmware signing keys for a lot of these things are also not controlled by the SoC vendor but rather the phone vendor and development boards can be obtained without keys burned into the fuses yet.
2
2
Replying to and
Having it isolated doesn't make the attacker gaining local code execution a non-issue though. There are direct consequences to these security vulnerabilities and it gives the attackers a way to compromise the rest of the device. It's a major step towards exploiting the OS.
1
1
Replying to and
Software including drivers is not generally written with much thought put into avoiding trust in the hardware. Hardware like the GPU is also assumed to enforce security boundaries. There's not much hope of that without security updates. It's complex and needs hardening / updates.
2
4
Show replies