Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: How do you trust that your personal machine is not compromised?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 469 posts

Re: Ask HN: How do you trust that your personal machine is not compromised?

#401

Post by mhh__ »

tete wrote: post #170
ignoramous wrote: post #111

ex-AOSP dev here Android and ChromiumOS are likely the most trustable computing platforms out there; doubly so for Android running on Pixels. If you don't prefer the ROM Google ships with, you can flash GrapheneOS or CalyxOS and relock the bootloader. Pixels have several protections in place: - Hardware root of trust: This is the anchor on which the entire TCB (trusted computing base) is built. - Cryptographic verifi…

> Android and ChromiumOS are likely the most trustable computing platforms out there I talked to a security researcher specializing on Android at a conference and he didn't sound like he'd agree. While I personally think ChromiumOS does a good job, I think a huge problem is that the issue is in how liberally complexity is added. And complexity is typically where security issues lurk. This has been seen again and agai…

Is openbsd not made to look more secure by the fact that it's so niche?

Who gives a shit about it enough to attack it a la (say) Windows?

Re: Ask HN: How do you trust that your personal machine is not compromised?

#402

Post by mikewarot »

a-dub wrote: post #331
lrvick wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO we have to step back and be honest that the Linux kernel is simply not equipped to run trusted code and untrusted code in the same memory. New bugs are found every few weeks. If history is of any guide Android and ChromiumOS likely still have many critical bugs the public does not know about yet. Sadly the only choice is to burn extra ram to give every security context a dedicated kernel and virtual machine. Hype…

i think tanenbaum will be vindicated in the end. monolithic kernels are like 90s computer networks with perimeter security. if i were to guess, i'd guess that the future is microkernels with some sort of hardware accelerated secure message passing facility. zero-trust at kernel design scale.

Obligatory mention of capability based security goes here.

We really need a way to run untrusted code and give it just the files we want, at run-time.

Re: Ask HN: How do you trust that your personal machine is not compromised?

#403

Post by lumb63 »

oneplane wrote: post #397
drozycki wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAIK there are no phones on the market with open-source baseband firmware, so you have to trust one of Qualcomm, Broadcom et al with access to all cellular communication. Do you have a best of breed supplier you’ve vetted?

I don't think you can trust any commercial baseband, period. They all have to adhere to complex radio standards, nobody wants to implement them because their design-by-committee stuff is boring/lame/hard/painful, so what you get is a few stacks that pass the tests and everyone builds on top of that. Same goes for any other RTOS-style firmware, it's really hard to get right, and because most of them are built by/for t…

I agree with your point about how the personality of (technology) companies doesn’t fit the security minded person well. As a software engineer, I feel I am in the small minority whenever I mention security or privacy concerns at work. I feel that most technology is evil at this point because of the immense ability of it to violate people’s privacy. It is sad to me that this is the state of the modern tech ecosystem.

Re: Ask HN: How do you trust that your personal machine is not compromised?

#405

Post by themadturk »

gnfargbl wrote: post #9

Here's a short, fairly practical guide that you might find helpful: https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/files/Cyber-Essentials-Requirements-... . It is aimed mostly at small businesses, but I find a lot of the guidance to be pretty relevant to my personal IT. My even shorter (and incomplete) summary of the document would be: configure your router and firewall; remove default passwords and crapware from your devices; use a lock s…

> Would be interested in hearing other things that HN'ers do to limit risk.

We have a pretty standard setup at work: screen times out after 15 minutes, and co-workers teach you pretty fast to lock your machine.

At home, where I use a MacBook Air, I work in a physically unstable situation...in a rocking chair, on my lap. Whenever I stand up, I close the machine, which locks it immediately. If not, I risk the machine sliding to the floor.

Re: Ask HN: How do you trust that your personal machine is not compromised?

#406

Post by vladvasiliu »

helloooooooo wrote: post #257
ignoramous wrote: post #111

ex-AOSP dev here Android and ChromiumOS are likely the most trustable computing platforms out there; doubly so for Android running on Pixels. If you don't prefer the ROM Google ships with, you can flash GrapheneOS or CalyxOS and relock the bootloader. Pixels have several protections in place: - Hardware root of trust: This is the anchor on which the entire TCB (trusted computing base) is built. - Cryptographic verifi…

Windows does all of those, in addition to fine grained access controls. I would go so far as to say that the Chromium sandbox implementation is better than on Android because of the ability to completely de-privilege processes.

> Windows does all of those, in addition to fine grained access controls.

Aren't those still user-based? So, in the typical case of a single-user computer, a rogue app that I run with my account would be able to access my data.

There's the protected folders thing (not sure about the name) since a few versions ago, which attempts to block random apps from accessing random folders.

But it's opt-in (folders are not protected by default, you have to add them one by one). It's also all or nothing: either a given app is "untrusted" and it can't access any of the protected folders, or it's "trusted" and it can access all of them.

I can't say I trust Photoshop to only touch my pictures folder, but not my .ssh folder.

Re: Ask HN: How do you trust that your personal machine is not compromised?

#408

Post by pjmlp »

ignoramous wrote: post #358
pjmlp wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Windows 10 and later run drivers and parts of the kernel on their own hypervisor slots. macOS has SIP. GNU/Linux is still not there doing this out of the box.

I'm curious about your take on this. Would you say macOS, iOS, Windows are more trustable than FOSS OSes like Fuschia or ChromeOS, Android, or even QubeOS and Tails? If not, where else ChromiumOS / Android lack (keeping in mind the embedded nature of the latter)? How long do you think before viable open firmware / open hardware computing devices show up? Thanks.

Unpopular opinion, none of them.

Because even for FOSS stuff, unless you are an expert on all levels of the stack you will not be able to assert there are some hidden exploits disguides as perfectly safe code.

And if you have to rely on third parties to assert that for you, then you will have to trush their honesty and technical skills to be able to assert such statements.

So there is only hope that all players are experts, don't do any mistakes, keep being honest, and exercise their certification for every new release for all products that make up a standard installation.

Re: Ask HN: How do you trust that your personal machine is not compromised?

#409

Post by raxxorraxor »

ignoramous wrote: post #111

ex-AOSP dev here Android and ChromiumOS are likely the most trustable computing platforms out there; doubly so for Android running on Pixels. If you don't prefer the ROM Google ships with, you can flash GrapheneOS or CalyxOS and relock the bootloader. Pixels have several protections in place: - Hardware root of trust: This is the anchor on which the entire TCB (trusted computing base) is built. - Cryptographic verifi…

My impression is that Android is compromised by design because it so easily leaks data that any defense against it already became futile. Apps might not have permissions to do anything, but the same is true for users.

Not that a Desktop with Windows would be any better. But I don't trust the OS itself, no matter how many layers of virtualization you put between code I choose to execute. The weak link is already provided by design. This isn't a technical criticism of Android, but the whole platform as being intransparent and paternalistic.

Not a fan of trusted computing because I doubt it will ever be used in the interest of users. It will be a requirement for some services, which I don't want to further support in their endeavours.

Re: Ask HN: How do you trust that your personal machine is not compromised?

#410

Post by mihaigalos »

I've taken steps to secure my Linux:

* Using Yubikey PAM always as a 2FA for ssh,sudo (also on every Linux in my home network).

* Always require authentication on each sudo command (prevents escalating once and then reusing privileges).

* Only running Docker with sudo as recommended (requires 2FA now).

* Closing all traffic other than services I need with nftables.

Regularly look at the journalctl for suspicious activity.

Post reply on HN