Hacker News Reader

Comment by 9dev | Hacker News Reader

Also, it requires me to trust Intel—an American company, to not have a backdoor in the SGX. That amounts to exactly no trust at all, so it’s a pass from me, and probably any non-US citizen.

View on HN

The backdoor is as simple as “Intel has all the signing keys for the hardware root of trust so they can sign anything they want” :)

Defense in depth dictates that this is more secure than standard VPNs out there (Mullvad, Proton, Nord, Express, etc.).

Any real security researcher recognizes this.

If you think 'trusting random strangers' is a better security architecture, then you should not work in security.

Defense in depth only works if you put up meaningful security measures. As numerous people including GP has pointed out, you still retain the means to log user traffic. That's not meaningfully secure than the alternatives.

More importantly, trusting random strangers is much better than trusting a known hostile actor. During the Freenode fiasco, you have repeatedly demonstrated yourself to be untrustworthy and vengeful. Everyone saw your petty revenges against people who dared voice the slightest of criticisms. Why on earth should anyone trust that you'll uphold your customer's privacy no matter what?

I think you should look into the narrative before parroting falsehoods. Further, I’m not sure what came off as a “revenge” in my response unless facts are being interpreted as such.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com