NHacker Next
  • new
  • past
  • show
  • ask
  • show
  • jobs
  • submit
Signing TLS handshakes inside a TPM (bschaatsbergen.com)
duk3luk3 3 hours ago [-]
Sounds interesting; too bad all we get is text made up by an LLM rather than any of the author's insights.
abound 3 hours ago [-]
Yeah I was interested for the first few paragraphs, then all of a sudden I get hit with two "genuinely"s and a

> That’s the third property, and it’s the one that decides this.

and I gave up at that point.

ram_rattle 2 hours ago [-]
Nothing new here, attested TLS was being discussed in IETF for quiet sometime right?

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-fossati-tls-attestati... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MF9AwkMJOlw

bschaatsbergen 37 seconds ago [-]
That's right, I'm learning in public here. In RATS we prove a machine is sound by measuring it and appraising the evidence. But after attestation the usual thing is to hand the machine a short-lived identity saying it is attested, and when that machine then authenticates over mTLS to something like an HSM, the thing that gives that machine its identity is a private key in a file. That bothered me, and there is surprisingly little written about closing that gap in RATS specifically. What I want is to tie that key in the TPM to the evidence of the confidential VM itself, and let that be the identity the machine carries after attestation. They're just working notes, feel free to correct me if my thinking is wrong here.
ranger_danger 2 hours ago [-]
Let's hope this doesn't get picked up by the (corporate) masses... the last thing I want is my browser offering personal TLS certificates to every server I visit as some kind of identity verification or fingerprint/tracking.

It's bad enough that ssh does this by default with all your keys.

altairprime 55 minutes ago [-]
Client TLS is rather unusable on the Internet by a typical random end user visiting a random public site, so that should at least keep the specific scenario you describe at bay.
ranger_danger 34 minutes ago [-]
Currently yes, but there's not much stopping Chrome etc. from adding a new feature that has a way of presenting a client certificate to a website in a backwards-compatible manner.

Of course the website itself would need to support that, but it's all possible in time.

altairprime 5 minutes ago [-]
[delayed]
bschaatsbergen 7 minutes ago [-]
[dead]
Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact
Rendered at 06:23:23 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.