In case it's not obvious, this is a hardware attack that lets someone with access to the motherboard (e.g. a cloud host) see what your VM is doing even if you use the CPU's security features that are supposed to prevent that. Intel's version (SGX) of that feature has been considered broken in other ways for years. Not sure about AMD's but I'd expect about the same. Better not run super high security stuff on hardware controlled by an attacker :).
this post was submitted on 02 Oct 2025
18 points (100.0% liked)
Cybersecurity
8415 readers
15 users here now
c/cybersecurity is a community centered on the cybersecurity and information security profession. You can come here to discuss news, post something interesting, or just chat with others.
THE RULES
Instance Rules
- Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.
- No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
- No Ads / Spamming.
- No pornography.
Community Rules
- Idk, keep it semi-professional?
- Nothing illegal. We're all ethical here.
- Rules will be added/redefined as necessary.
If you ask someone to hack your "friends" socials you're just going to get banned so don't do that.
Learn about hacking
Other security-related communities !databreaches@lemmy.zip !netsec@lemmy.world !securitynews@infosec.pub !cybersecurity@infosec.pub !pulse_of_truth@infosec.pub
Notable mention to !cybersecuritymemes@lemmy.world
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Any machine with which an attacker has had physical access to should be considered compromised
I don't imagine trusting any countermeasure close to enough to invalidate that rule