AMD, Google, Microsoft & NVIDIA Announce "Caliptra" Open-Source Root of Trust

[dp_alvarez]

The thing being open source does not matter, if replacing the software will be impossible.

That is the core of the problem, hardware roots of trust, remote attestation, etc aren't necessarily evil by themselves.
But they do create all the necessary foundations for corporations to take away any control users have over their devices.
Google already started enforcing this with SafetyNet, Apple also has their mobiles very well locked down.
Microsoft is very likely to be the next to try it, given they are developing Pluton.

So in practical terms, new hardware-backed "security measures" are very likely to be bad news for user freedom.

[sdack]

I'm all for hardware root of trust. Without it, we can't have trusted compute environments which can safely hold things like our TOTP, FIDO2, fingerprint, etc authentication tokens, and we can't know that our systems haven't been backdoored at the UEFI firmware or boot payload level. If anything, we should be championing even deeper root of trust.

Just because it is open source does not mean the actual implementation as ship by vendors can or will not contain backdoors. I would rather assume that it is likely for some vendors to put backdoors into it, especially since it is open source and thus easier to modify. Sort of a "bait and switch"-tactic - bait the open source community to make it secure, then use it against them and put your own backdoor in.

[linuxgeex]

Another hardware backdoor?
Every time I see the word "trust", "secure", whatever, I know something is fishy!

This isn't a backdoor. It's a tool for guaranteeing that the boot environment and boot payload meet a set of security criteria so that it's provably safe from the POV of the engineers of the boot environment and the boot payload.

Like any tool, it can be abused. It's the abuse that should be concerning, not the tool. Otherwise you should also be upset that there's factories making butter spreaders that could be used to stab you to death.

I'm all for hardware root of trust. Without it, we can't have trusted compute environments which can safely hold things like our TOTP, FIDO2, fingerprint, etc authentication tokens, and we can't know that our systems haven't been backdoored at the UEFI firmware or boot payload level. If anything, we should be championing even deeper root of trust.

However, there needs to be legislation put in place to ensure that consumers are protected from black boxes. That includes threats like manufacturer/engineer hubris and sloppy work, state hubris and sloppy work, middleman hubris and sloppy work, and bad actors at all levels. And the only way to ensure that is to legislate that all ROT firmwares and payloads are open-source so that consumers can verify the lack of hubris, sloppy work, and bad acting.

Failing legislation enforcing open source for ROT firmware and payloads, then we need legislation enforcing 100% at retail taxation of black-box firmware and payloads, with the proceeds going towards consumer protection, and for that taxation to show up on the receipt so that consumers are painfully aware of the cost.

[Mat2]

The thing people seem to not be grasping is the fully open source nature of this project. While I'm sure this assemblage of <s>evil</s> corporations could find ways to subvert that with fun loopholes and such, it's at least potentially a good thing.

The thing being open source does not matter, if replacing the software will be impossible.

[cl333r]

In corporate parlance "trusted" = Not allowing you the user to be in control of your HW that you paid for so that corporations are in full control.

[mahurinj]

The thing people seem to not be grasping is the fully open source nature of this project. While I'm sure this assemblage of <s>evil</s> corporations could find ways to subvert that with fun loopholes and such, it's at least potentially a good thing.

Edit: does strikethrough not work?

[Mat2]

The user and not the hardware vendor should be able to decide which code runs on their devices. I especially won't trust Google here, which supports denying access to applications for users with rooted Android devices (Google SafetyNet a.k.a corporate Digital Restrictions Management).

[Dukenukemx]

When I think of trust, oh yea, I think of Google, Microsoft & NVIDIA.

[jabl]

How does this compare to https://opentitan.org/ ?

[Ironmask]

It's about time Analog TRNG was added as standard. How did we go this many decades without that being on every desktop?

> notably absent from today's announcement is Intel.

Intel couldn't figure out a way to make this insecure so they just decided the best insecurity they could add to their product is to not add this at all.