I am optmistic about real privacy in modern times and publish quite effort on the topic, so that others can have verifiable privacy too.

On the other hand my dear counterpart, you have quite a few suspicious hardware decisions on your belt and already got exposed endorsing government developed tools like Tor.

There isn't a particular reason for me to call out the obvious attack vectors of using compromised hardware.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

SHA-256, the hash function that's fundamental to Bitcoin, was developed by the NSA.

We need an elite security expert like you to get on the case.

Go harass the Bitcoin Core devs and GTFO of here.

Bitcoin itself was developed by an NSA contractor, used since the beginning by government authorities to track drug transactions. Reason why it was replaced by Monero a few years down the road.

It was quite cute those days at the beginning, albeit the hashing is a waste of electricity and computing power. Subsequent projects somehow minimized that kind of waste but I'm yet to see a project that makes PoW useful as byproduct for something else.

We are all still here because we want to know hw model and Os that Brito is using in real life, it would be really nice to know. So we cam evaluate if it's a better solution compared to Pixel/graphene combo.

All depends on your security model and needs. Just because I point some obvious hardware flaws, doesn't mean I need to use them myself.

I'm the kind of guy that writes embedded operating systems on dedicated hardware and networks just to know in detail what is used. Even there exist exploits to be aware.

For example, Wi-Fi chips cannot simply be trusted and the alternatives are still expensive: https://archive.fosdem.org/2021/stands.fosdem.org/stands/openwifi/

It is a long and lonely road without fame nor profit. You are welcome to join if you are interested on the topic.