Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by narrator 1120 days ago
Have a really small 4g hotspot hotglued to a tiny Linux computer running the Tails distribution read-only with a removable SD card with all your data and no executable code on it if you're a real cypherpunk.
3 comments

Why a hotspot instead of a USB 4g modem? Concerned about 4g hardware/driver vulns but not WiFi hardware/driver vulns?

Edit: yes, I guess you're concerned about sim-resident malware exploiting the modem, exploiting the rest of the machine via USB.

Also, if you're that paranoid, you should probably be running something seL4-based to better compartmentalize compromises.

We really ought to push for something better than Tails. I'd love to run something like it on an aarch64-linux or riscv64-linux board. I'd love to run something that doesn't have a hacked, nearly broken debian boot process, which broke the ability to kexec it many versions ago, etc.

/me keeps (semi-)patiently waiting for SpectrumOS... https://spectrum-os.org/

I'm guessing you're connecting to 4G with a sim card? Essentially a small computer, so you're exposed that way regardless.
The 4g is in the hotspot that you're connecting to via wifi from the mini-computer. That way you don't have baseband firmware exploits to deal with on the linux machine like you would now with a traditional android phone. 4G firmware are all binary blobs that probably have backdoors.
Hotspot. You assume the hotspot is compromised and only connect via WiFi
If the hotspot were compromised, why would you connect to it at all?
Because you want internet. The attack surface against your laptop is only the WiFi interactions.

A WiFi access point has far less capability to hack its clients than a baseband firmware on an LTE modem with direct memory access to the host.

This is basic opsec stuff. If you’re interested it is a cool rabbit hole to go down just to see how insecure standard systems are.

So am I to understand that from an OpSec perspective, connecting a machine to a known compromised system, is ok to do, “because you want internet”?

Maybe because I’m not opsec and don’t know my ass from a hole in the ground, but my security recommendation would be, no, do not purposely connect your machine to a known compromised system regardless of its advertised purpose, attack vectors, attack surface, probability of unwanted exploitation, or justification as to why it’s necessary to do so, because you’re exposing yourself, and possibly corporate machine and network, to compromise. Find a trusted system (aka audited and considered reasonably low risk while acknowledging no system can ever be deemed fully secure and trust, or zero trust is a large determining factor) and consider the compromised machine as not existing at all, therefore not being an option at all, because connecting to it would go against common sense and 8th graders practice better security habits