Better gaming battery life that way, definitely, but not without significant latency that can't all be eliminated.
Attacker breaking into home/office & successfully tampering w/phys tamper-resistent server != normal person's threat model.
-
-
Device seizure at border or traffic stop & browser-sandbox-escape drive-by malware OTOH are in normal person's threat model.
-
This doesn't do anything to mitigate either.
-
Seizure is completely mitigated by having no data on the device.
-
Browser exploits are mitigated by having a sufficiently powerful cpu on the server to be running something Qubes-like.
-
Virtualization works fine on existing mobile hardware. Implementing that is not a hardware issue.
-
Virtualization also isn't the only good approach to tight sandboxing, and is used for compatibility not security properties.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Far more likely than anything you're mitigating, and your model is incompatible with proper physical security.
-
It introduces all kinds of new attack vectors, and doesn't actually remove any or provide additional security properties.
-
Plus same vendors are just going to be churning out this server hardware and doing the same stuff they do on client hardware.
-
No. The whole idea is to displace the vendors selling the crap they sell now.
-
So instead there will be vendors selling a poor implementation of that instead. Good stuff exists today, people mostly buy bad.
-
Good stuff costs too much for people who need it to afford, especially when you have to trash it after potential compromise.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.