Peter Gutmann wrote: > In fact none of the people/organisations I queried about this fitted into any > of the proposed categories, it was all embedded devices, typically SCADA > systems, home automation, consumer electronics, that sort of thing, so it was > really a single category which was "Embedded systems". Given the string of > attacks on crypto in embedded devices (XBox, iPhone, iOpener, Wii, some > not-yet-published ones on HDCP devices :-), etc) this is by far the most > at-risk category because there's a huge incentive to attack them, the result > affects tens/hundreds of millions of devices, and the attacks are immediately > and widely actively exploited (modchips/device unlocking/etc, an important > difference between this and academic proof-of-concept attacks), so this is > the > one where I'd expect the vendors to care most.
But they've all been unlocked using easier attacks, surely? -- http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html http://www.links.org/ "There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he doesn't mind who gets the credit." - Robert Woodruff --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]