-8
submitted 5 months ago by Misk@lemmy.world to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

I know people have mixed opinions on Braxman but I don't see any huge leaps in logic here tbh... Thoughts?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] GolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.ml 17 points 5 months ago

3 letter agencies, governments in general and data hungry companies will continue searching for a way to bypass encryption. And just a reminder: direct access to the system (remote or physical) bypasses all kinds of encryption unless it's protected separately. Backdoors and kernel level anti-cheats ftw

[-] jet@hackertalks.com 5 points 5 months ago
[-] PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Eh, kind of. Remote Desktop with an admin account would be more useful than physical access to a locked computer. Because if Bitlocker is enabled, then all that matters is that you can sign into the computer. Use strong passwords, don’t open RDP to the WAN, lock your workstations when walking away, etc…

Even cloning the drive to crack later (historically, this was a popular choice if you had physical access) is pretty useless if you don’t have a user’s password.

[-] dwindling7373@feddit.it 3 points 5 months ago

Not really? If disks are encrypted good luck getting anything out of it. A remote access to a running machine? It's all laid there.

[-] Misk@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

Physical access like an NPU chip fixed onto your motherboard?

[-] jet@hackertalks.com 2 points 5 months ago

Sure, anything with direct bus access to unencrypted data.... that'll do it

[-] GolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.ml 3 points 5 months ago

I didn't mean that. I meant if the hacker has access to the administrator (or just user in case with E2EE messengers) account, they can see and download anything, no matter how encrypted it is. The chips can do stuff as well but idk any proof of that tbh

[-] jet@hackertalks.com 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Sure, side channel leakage if you can run locally.

Honestly, most machines have enough cores, that you could pin a process to a specific core giving it independent cache, and work around a lot of these side channel attacks. So you're encrypted end to end messenger would get an exclusive core. Kind of like how we do VM pinning nowadays

this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2024
-8 points (42.0% liked)

Privacy

31937 readers
596 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

Chat rooms

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS