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?
That sounds reasonable. I would remind you, you accused me of trolling for even questioning the value of anti-persistence earlier. It sounds like you agree it's not a crazy position anymore, so I'll consider that a good result 
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Not sure it makes a difference, the benefit of Qubes is isolation, so a 0day cannot access data not necessary for the VM's operation. That is reasonable, persistence doesn't make much difference, attacks can be repeated and are most often valuable even if ephemeral.
- 1 more reply
-
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.