Tim Mahoney
(replying to Saagar Jha)
@saagar That’s a good question. You’d hope that this whole system was provably secure even if someone has access to all the hardware, software, everything. I guess we’ll see as more information comes out.
Saagar Jha
(replying to Tim Mahoney)
2 replies
Tim Mahoney
(replying to Saagar Jha)
@saagar from what I gather, part of the hard problem here is running the code in an environment that is protected from peeking at the data even while the execution is in progress. Basically like Intel SGX, but not compromised.
The write up mentions the Secure Enclave. Maybe Apple figured it out?
Mark Pauley
(replying to Tim Mahoney)
@_tim______ @saagar I am assuming that if you cannot cryptographically guarantee the actual topology of the hardware it’s running on then you can never be 100% secure if Alice can’t even trust Bob. Maybe with homomorphic encryption?
Light
(replying to Mark Pauley)
@unsaturated @_tim______ @saagar
>Maybe with homomorphic encryption?
That's what I assumed was being talked about at first.
Mark Pauley
(replying to Light)
@light @_tim______ @saagar I’ve heard HE basically doesn’t work :tiredcat:
Dominic Hopton
(replying to Saagar Jha)
@saagar @_tim______ in many ways this whole space is riddled with ‘no liquids’ security theater. You only need *one* person to get through the ‘perimeter’ with a ‘magic dongle’ that reads stuff off the side of the rack. Or *one* person to open a gap. If you don’t get it through the first 10,000 times, it’s OK. But that 10,001th time…