Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 8th Mar 2010 19:04 UTC, submitted by gogothebee
Post a Comment
RE: Same principle? SAME EXACT STORY
by poundsmack on Mon 8th Mar 2010 21:29 UTC
in reply to "Same principle?"
This is the same story that was reported on in this thread: http://www.osnews.com/comments/22964
This about sums it up: http://www.osnews.com/thread?412272
This made a huge splash on Slashdot, but I'm not sure what the big deal is. As I understand it, their attack involves widely varying the voltage supplying the CPU that is manipulating the private key. A sane person would realize that the key being used is in memory, and probably also in a physical storage medium attached to that memory, and would not need to burn out the CPU by overvolting it.
What am I missing from this? Or are we really exaggerating a piece of nothing?
A sane person would realize that the key being used is in memory, and probably also in a physical storage medium attached to that memory, and would not need to burn out the CPU by overvolting it.
In the case of embedded devices, such as smart cards, it might be more convenient to fiddle with the power supply than to try and get access to the memory. But yes, the impact of this "security flaw" is widely exaggerated. The average Slashdot reader probably only gets "RSA is broken", and that would be quite a story.



