This is exceptionally poor advice. This is why TPM exists. Unfortunately adoption is low with the Linux crowd because they still believe the misinformation from 20 years ago.
This is exceptionally poor advice. This is why TPM exists. Unfortunately adoption is low with the Linux crowd because they still believe the misinformation from 20 years ago.
TPM collocates a physical key on the same host, incurs its own set of trade-offs with failures or physical access in dormancy, and requires trusting yet another vendor supply chain. There are always better options, but since the Intel Management Engine can access TPM... such solutions incur new problems. Privilege escalation through TPM Sniffing is also rather trivial these days.
Have a great day. =3
Nowadays you use the fTPM built inside the CPU. And if you don't trust the CPU maker, well, you have bigger problems.
The best plans simply don't require secrecy. ymmv
Have a glorious day =3
On Intel & AMD, both have a "hidden core" (i.e., a 4-core processor is really a 5-core processor), and they run proprietary, closed-source operating systems that literally no one outside of Intel or the NSA has any idea what they do.
We do know it has full access to the fTMP, RAM, and Network.
We also know that the NSA has a special contract to obtain Intel processors with the IME disabled... Why would they want that if the processors were trustworthy[1]?
[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20170830201623/https://hardocp.c...