[148623] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: [Cryptography] [IP] 'We cannot trust' Intel and Via's
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (dan@geer.org)
Mon Dec 23 10:34:28 2013
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
From: dan@geer.org
To: Bill Cox <waywardgeek@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 23 Dec 2013 00:33:15 EST."
<52B7CB1B.7050007@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2013 09:01:46 -0500
Cc: cryptography@metzdowd.com
Errors-To: cryptography-bounces+crypto.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@metzdowd.com
Bill Cox writes, in part:
|
| Anyway, it's a nice thought that RISC CPUs might provide more trust
| due to their simplicity, but given the complexity of modern RISC
| architectures like ARM, forget it. There's no modern CPU of any
| reasonable performance that isn't too complicated to easily audit.
| There's a lot of room for back doors that no one would ever find,
| RISC or CISC, IMO.
No doubt true. No doubt.
There must be a {rule of thumb, nomogram, proportionality constant}
relating the build-up of complexity and the build-up of occult risk,
mustn't there? Machines beat human chess (and other game) players
not by being smarter but by grinding a solution out. One wonders
if AI doesn't eventually have the power to find back doors that no
human could ever find. Then what?
--dan
_______________________________________________
The cryptography mailing list
cryptography@metzdowd.com
http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
