Trusted Platform Computing in 3... 2... 1...

microtonal 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

We are already there and it is called Play Integrity (meets STRONG integrity) and Google is trying to get apps to use it to shut out competitors. They are succeeding to some extend (see the Volkswagen and IKEA Smart Home apps as recent successes for Google).

Google should not be allowed to abuse its duopoly position in this way. I recommend EU citizens to report every case they are (potentially) affected by to the EU DMA team.

▲

alerighi 3 hours ago | parent [-]

I think that the EU shall render this practice (and the equivalent from Apple) illegal, stating that every citizen has a right to modify their own device without consequences, and that consequences shall include also having apps not working.

But to me big tech succeeded also lobbying the EU like they already did in the US, in fact they violate multiple EU rules (GDPR, etc.) without facing any consequence, and when they try to announce they would do something at the other side of the ocean they treat us that they will double or triple tariffs so...

	▲	LoganDark 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> stating that every citizen has a right to modify their own device without consequences, and that consequences shall include also having apps not working. iOS being so difficult to jailbreak means that most apps don't have any verification at all. Even most DRM doesn't even try to verify that the device isn't jailbroken in order to access the highest resolutions or whatever. But if we ever add a first-party option for the device to be modified, then we start running into the Android situation where every app has some invasive root/tamper detection thing. Some apps already have anti-debugging things, but the situation on iOS could be far, far worse.

▲

mrheosuper 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If AI is good enough to find RCE in google code, maybe it can crack TPM

▲

RealityVoid 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

This ideea haunts me in my nightmares.

▲

zekica 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Trusted computing is fine and even good only if the owner (the person/company that bought the device) is in control, but it's not the world we live in.

	▲	nananana9 an hour ago \| parent [-]
		> owner (the person/company that bought the device) At this point I'm willing to argue that the owner of a device is whoever is legally allowed to log in as root. When I pay for server colocation, I'm the owner - and not whoever runs the building - because I decide what runs on the box, and if they tamper with it they can go to jail. With phones it's the same, except that you pay Google for the privilege for keeping their device safe, charged, connected to the Internet, and walking it around every day with you, so they can collect better data. The only thing they can't do is snatch it from your hands, but why would they - you're doing so much useful work for them. And of course if you try to root it, you're breaking a digital lock, which is punishable by up to 10 years in prison and $1,000,000, so the colocation analogy holds there too.