You started at rolling reboots every minute, then you changed to hourly reboots, so how often will you reboot to achieve this reduction in value? Um, if physical proximity is required, can't you just drop a transmitter in their office?
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @HarperMitchell
Okay, so for the sake of discussion can we make X one year?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @HarperMitchell
Cool, so can we make X one year? The only answers should be "sure", or "I'm wrong, X has an upper bound and it is N".
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @HarperMitchell
Cool, so the scenario that proves anti-persistence is valuable is: Attacker only has an exploit that requires physical proximity, they can't repeat it (for some reason), and only wants data that doesn't exist yet (for some reason), and that data won't exist for over a year?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @taviso @HarperMitchell
The reason the time matters is the only way anti-persistence makes a difference is if you have regular reboots. Users do not like, but will tolerate monthly reboots (e.g. patch tuesday), so we need a common scenario where that mitigates the attack to justify this mitigation, yes?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
Sure, I understand that. You do believe it's important enough to accuse me of trolling for questioning it's value though 
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.