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
-
Replying to @marcan42 @pavolrusnak
On one side, chips have been audited by highly skilled 3rd party lab and are designed for security On the other side, chips are pwned by design... Auditability is great if it improves the security, if no skilled people audit them and they are already pwned, what's the point?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @P3b7_ @pavolrusnak
On one side, firmware has not been audited by anyone competent (evidence: ROCA; it's clear that FIPS certification and such is useless) On the other, you can audit it yourself, and people will for a popular product.
1 reply 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @marcan42 @pavolrusnak
FIPS is not very relevant... Common Criteria certification is. (and ROCA chip was CC certified). CC are not perfect (hence ROCA), but it doesn't mean they are useless... It remains far away more difficult to break a CC chip, than a STM32
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Auditability is great, but only if it brings more security! Auditability on a broken device only allows everyone to verify it's indeed broken... NDA for secure chips is not ideal, but vendors want to protect their IPs... Designing a secure chip is not easy!
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @P3b7_ @pavolrusnak
Re NDAs, nonsense. That's all just either security by obscurity (fear of actual flaws being discovered by wider auditing) or corporate image BS. Making your programming spec public does not give away your silicon secrets, otherwise *no* IC vendor would do it.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @marcan42 @pavolrusnak
It allows to understand how countermeasures are working...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @P3b7_ @pavolrusnak
No it doesn't. The programming spec is irrelevant for stuff like silicon voltage monitors and metal layer meshes, which are the kinds of things which actually provide environmental security.
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
No, making the documentation non-public means people aren't going to find your mistakes and flaws earlier, thus ensuring that when you *do* get pwned, there is a huge install base of vulnerable products. Security by obscurity does. Not. Work. Don't try to claim it does.
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.