Intel's "Walled Garden"

I don't seee how Intel's buying McAffee has anything to do with CPU's. To me it must mean end products we don't know about yet. Like if Intel was going to sell their own branded version of the iPad or iPhone, etc. I heard a brief blurb today on the news that Intel was coming out with a tablet. That's all I heard, nothing else.
 
I watched the actual Intel Developer's Conference video and it seems like they want to move from a antivirus based computing to a white list based or trusted software computing. I'm not sure how they plan to do this. Perhaps they will run non-trusted software in a VM seperate from the operating system or maybe it means they want to start controlling what you can run on their CPUs. I'm not sure.
 
Epitaph64 said:
I watched the actual Intel Developer's Conference video and it seems like they want to move from a antivirus based computing to a white list based or trusted software computing. I'm not sure how they plan to do this. Perhaps they will run non-trusted software in a VM seperate from the operating system or maybe it means they want to start controlling what you can run on their CPUs. I'm not sure.
Click to expand...

Hardwae based anti viri? Or viri suits that run in their own vm, so they can't be touched by viruses and maybe work with in a hardware accelerated state on cpus that support virtualization? Maybe they are just looking to revamp the way CEP works?
 
Maybe they're just going to require digital sigs for anything running in Ring 0? Which, ideally, should just be OSes, right?
 
Yes, hardware based anti-virus, the only software needed would be the definitions. I have a dual core at work and one of them is practically dedicated to monitoring, antivirus, anti-malware, ect.
 
Mega666 said:
Yes, hardware based anti-virus, the only software needed would be the definitions. I have a dual core at work and one of them is practically dedicated to monitoring, antivirus, anti-malware, ect.
Click to expand...

The problem with this approach is that there are attack vectors which don't depend on running any malignant code on the host system. E.g. a XSS attack or a pure social engineering attack which tricks you into giving up your userID/password. Or how about the tried-and-true Nigerian letters? They are still used, because they still "work." Don't forget that the "business model" for hackers assumes that distributing the malware is essentially free, and they are assuming that even if .0001% of recipients fall for the scam, they get to make money, lots and lots of money.

This is like Blockbuster trying to reorganize after bankrupcty to do a better job of renting tapes and DVDs. Like anyone still goes to a Blockbuster store, LOL.
 
this can help on some types of attacks, but really you are a monetary source and there are a lot of smart people that want some of what you have, and they will figure out a way, when applied to enough people, to get some of that money.
 
x509 said:
The problem with this approach is that there are attack vectors which don't depend on running any malignant code on the host system. E.g. a XSS attack or a pure social engineering attack which tricks you into giving up your userID/password. Or how about the tried-and-true Nigerian letters? They are still used, because they still "work." Don't forget that the "business model" for hackers assumes that distributing the malware is essentially free, and they are assuming that even if .0001% of recipients fall for the scam, they get to make money, lots and lots of money.

This is like Blockbuster trying to reorganize after bankrupcty to do a better job of renting tapes and DVDs. Like anyone still goes to a Blockbuster store, LOL.
Click to expand...

There is not a program out there that can stop a user from being tricked into falling for this. This is not an antivirus issue but a human social engineering issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top