Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by natch 2752 days ago
>We're essentially talking about a physical item here

I don’t even... OK, you have yourself a nice rest of your day.
1 comments
ryanlol 2752 days ago
How do you propose the keys would escape a HSM? You wouldn't keep this stuff connected to the network, so someone would have to get physical access to even attempt to attack it.
link
natch 2752 days ago
lol!
link
ryanlol 2752 days ago
Do you even know what a HSM is? Did you consider their existence before initially commenting?

If you do know what HSMs are, do you believe that they’re all useless?

Idk where the “lol!” came from, we’re talking about extremely standard cryptographic key storage here.

link
natch 2751 days ago
You are seriously not trolling? Google “weakest link” and re-read the thread. An HSM is not magic and does not fix all the problems.
link
ryanlol 2751 days ago
How would a government lose control of keys generated and stored within a offline HSM in a shielded room, without actually losing possession of that HSM? This is very obviously not unfeasible to implement in a secure manner.

So far you've only given examples of secrets which are really easy to lose control of, this simply isn't one.

I'm not trying to argue that this should be done, you claimed this can't be done which is obviously false

link
natch 2750 days ago
I claimed what? Let's see the quote.

Reality is simply more messy than what you are envisioning.

What do you think an HSM is good for?

link