AMD to license ARM for TrustZone integration with Cortex A5

[piesquared]

Rumor for the first integration will be in Kabini, next gen for the Brazos platform.

Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) is to license technology from rival chip designer ARM Holdings.

The US firm plans to add an ARM-based processor to its computer chipsets alongside its own x86-based CPU (central processing unit) and GPU (graphics processing unit) technology.

The ARM-based core will be dedicated to offering security features to safeguard actions such as online payments.

Analysts say this could be the beginning of an important relationship.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18434285

 

[Idontcare]

Is this AMD's answer to what Intel plans on doing with their McAfee acquisition?

 

[piesquared]

I'd say intel's McAffee aquisition is inconsequential to what AMD is doing. AMD is just providing a solution to what the market demands.

 

[truckerCLOCK]

That sounds like hardware DRM to me.

 

[grimpr]

That sounds like hardware DRM to me.

Yeah, reminds me of this. :biggrin:

http://www.infowars.com/remote-kill-switch-added-to-intels-newest-processor/

 

[blckgrffn]

Sounds like a great feature for a game console or two.

Great as in aimed directly @ piracy.

Good article via Ars & Peter Bright/Dr. Pizza (who is a mod here? cool, I say):

http://arstechnica.com/information-...to-add-arm-processors-to-boost-chip-security/

 

[podspi]

Yeah, it seems like AMD has decided it doesn't make sense for them to create their own security platform, so they're using ARM's. Honestly, this is a good idea. No reason for them to reinvent the wheel, and then have everybody ignore it because of their (lack of) marketshare...

 

[Idontcare]

I'd say intel's McAffee aquisition is inconsequential to what AMD is doing. AMD is just providing a solution to what the market demands.

I understand the former is a matter of opinion since neither of us are AMD executive decision makers who would know if such a statement is true or not, but the latter statement you make explains absolutely nothing to me.

The market is demanding an x86 coprocessor that is bundled with trustzone integration with Corex A5?

 

[AtenRa]

If im not mistaken this is the same as Intel's Trusted Execution Technology.

 

[BLaber]

I understand the former is a matter of opinion since neither of us are AMD executive decision makers who would know if such a statement is true or not, but the latter statement you make explains absolutely nothing to me.

The market is demanding an x86 coprocessor that is bundled with trustzone integration with Corex A5?

Yes it does for Tablets & also for personal devices which corporates don't allow a employee to bring to office since they cant be secured within office network without being on domain e.t.c , this is AMD's solution to such problems related to their products of future.

 

[SocketF]

If im not mistaken this is the same as Intel's Trusted Execution Technology.

No, for TXT you still need an additional TPM module. Truezone it is the same as Intels Identity Protection Technology (IPT):
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us...n/identity-protection-technology-general.html

Both are running an external, independent supposedly "secure" OS, in between the OS you know and see and Hardware. The user has *no* clue what is going on. If that "secure" OS would be hacked, user have no clue what is going on, no Virus Software would be able to detect it.

But of course, that will never, ever happen, because it is "secure".

Edit:
Basically this "secure OS" is not so much different from a trojan horse. In both cases u have no clue what is going on inside these "black boxes". The difference is only that you know about the "secure OS" in beforehand. Thus, it is not an open back-door to your computer, but the open front-door....

Good article via Ars & Peter Bright/Dr. Pizza (who is a mod here? cool, I say):

http://arstechnica.com/information-...to-add-arm-processors-to-boost-chip-security/

Well .. by not mentioning IPT they miss the big picture.

 

[dealcorn]

Increasingly, mobile devices may be permitted access to corporate networks only if they have the functional equivalent of TrustZone or better technology. AMD decided to license from ARM rather than build their own. It is likely cheaper to incorporate an entire A-5 into their design rather than carve out the TrustZone functionality and only pay to fab that. Longer term AMD may figure out how to benefit from the non TrustZone functionality of the A-5 but short term AMD likely requires more transistors to implement this functionality than Intel. This sounds like a prudent, purely defensive move to preserve access to markets. However, the combination of license fees and wafer real estate does not help AMD profit margins.

 

[ShintaiDK]

This worries me like virtualizations, UEFI and so on. Because sooner or later you get a trojan etc running as a rootkit. In its own inaccessible parts, totally invisible to your regular OS.

 

[podspi]

This worries me like virtualizations, UEFI and so on. Because sooner or later you get a trojan etc running as a rootkit. In its own inaccessible parts, totally invisible to your regular OS.

Yes, who watches the watchers and all that. Honestly, I'm not sure how well all of these hardware security measures will work. Can they be patched? Do we want them to be able to be patched? Can they recover from fatal errors gracefully? If my "secure world" crashes, what happens to the normal world?

And of course, bringing this back down to earth, the biggest impact this will likely have for us normal end-users is that if we pay to watch a movie on the computer and don't spring for the extra "TV-license" (Only $3 more!), the computer won't output the movie to the TV...