So, the problem with USB tokens that we basically have two choices: - Unauditable black boxes built on *supposedly* more secure ICs that require NDAs to develop for - Open and auditable, but definitely pwnable off the shelf microcontrollers. Which poison do you prefer?
-
Show this thread
-
So far I've favored the first one, because you *know* all those keys based on a random STM32 are going to be glitchable, and closed stuff *might* be better. But after ROCA and other fails, maybe open firmware is better and just hope nobody physically attacks your key?
3 replies 0 retweets 10 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @marcan42
You don't need to "hope", there are active mitigation to physical attack vectors.
@Trezor actively promotes using passphrase, which can give you measurable protection against physical threats (in contrast to just hope and trust in case of SE).https://blog.trezor.io/is-your-passphrase-strong-enough-d687f44c63af …1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Ideally you have *both* physical attack mitigations *and* a strong passphrase that cryptographically wraps your private key.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Ideally, but HW vendors with SE sell you "trust our certified chip" and passphrase doesn't fit their narrative :-). Honestly, there's no ideal hardware solution yet. All SE are covered by tons of obscurity coming from current chip industry, where you cannot fart without NDA.
2 replies 1 retweet 1 like
Indeed, hence my tweet :-) It's a sad state of affairs, tbh. There is no good reason not to have *any* open option for SEs.
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.