Unfortunately the industry is filled with corner cutting, from ‘winmodems’ to ‘winprinters’ to simply aweful promises when it comes to USB technology simply so some dick can save 5cents per unit. If someone has access to your machine – you’re f–ked already all the gymnastics in the world won’t change the reality that the would-be hardware hijacker as you by your balls even if you didn’t have a firewire device. To bring up the DMA issue sounds like the death throws of desperation than concerns about genuine security concerns of Ms Sixpack having her machine hacked whilst surfing the internet all because of a firewire port. There’s more to security than keeping Joe Blogs safe from the web. What about company workstations? Public access / cyber cafes? Media labs? There are plenty of occasions when a system needs to be secured from it’s physical users. While nobody is disputing that physical machine access opens the system up to a great deal more attack vectors, that also doesn’t mean that firewire should hand them an additional one on a silver platter.ĭMA in firewire was cut corner. Now I’m not saying that makes USB > Firewire. I’m just saying that corners were cut with firewire as well. I just wanted to give your posts some perspective as they read as if firewire could do no wrong while USB failed at every hurdle. Intel not implementing USB3? Perhaps because it’s basically worthless. The increase in speed is minor, at the expense of CPU. USB is so badly designed and implemented, it has never come close to the real world speeds seen with Firewire.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |