On Fri, Apr 17, 2015, 6:58 AM coderman <[1]coderman@gmail.com> wrote:

     On 4/17/15, Lodewijk andré de la porte <[2]l@odewijk.nl> wrote:
     >....  I think the Intel platform is too
     > big to not be exploited (more or less) on the hardware level. I
     have a very
     > little better feeling about AMD but I don't think it's based on
     much.
     >
     > The idea that ARM processors are much much smaller and therefore
     easier to
     > audit makes them less attractive exploit targets. ...

     essentially they're all suspect under some level of modest threat
     (e.g. CUSTOMS interdiction or TAO enabling or ...)

     so then you get to openRISC on an openFAB with strong chain of
     custody
     along every step from sand to structure to send to self(and if you
     lose proper custody of device that's your problem; see threat models
     again :)

     ---

     [3]https://openrisc.github.io/
     [4]http://www.globalfoundries.com/ for openHW?
     [5]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chain_of_custody

     ---

     oh, and of course the occasional FIB tear-down of fabricated cores
     to
     confirm no surreptitious corruptions.  pick your favorite hard
     problem
     :P

     best regards,

   So what you guys are saying is... When I go Incognito Mode in Chrome,
   that little spy guy isn't really protecting me from everyone spying?

References

   1. mailto:coderman@gmail.com
   2. mailto:l@odewijk.nl
   3. https://openrisc.github.io/
   4. http://www.globalfoundries.com/
   5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chain_of_custody