|
|
|
|
|
by fstokesman
1438 days ago
|
|
If you code to a standard, this is less of a problem. If you implement AES in a way that produces a different output to someone elses implementation, then you by definition haven't implemented AES. From a binary trust perspective, this is maybe a good way of ensuring that you're running the code you really think you are - but really you just kick the can down the road. You didn't build the hardware, and thus you don't know it's doing with your data once the instructions start executing. Is it storing them off to a side-buffer? Is the CPU detecting AES-like behaviour and triggering some surreptitious path? Who knows. This is where projects like precursor (https://player.vimeo.com/video/677854277?h=8ad58eece9) are really interesting. To be really, super sure that your code is running as expected, you have to build the world from the ground up. |
|