Hardware level security can only solve some security problems. For instance NX zones makes buffer overflows more difficult to exploit (but not impossible, return-to-libc). The cpu archatecture you are using isn't going to affect more common vulnerablites like SQL Injection and I don't think it can. There can also be vulnerabilities in hardware, for instance this vulnerability in Intel cpu's.
Intel wants to make their current products more secure. Intel also has a lot of money in savings and they might be looking at this recent purchase as an investment in a growing field.
This thread is a little old, but you can also read about the Intel Secure Key technology (Random Number generation) that is built into Intel processors (starting in 2012 generation processors.) The implementation guide goes into detail about what makes it more secure than a software-based implementation.
In short, the best technology we have for random number generation is Intel Secure Key, which uses the RdRand and RdSeed instruction sets. It is a cryptographically-secure pseudorandom number generator that uses an on-chip entropy source to randomly seed the number generator. Its fully compliant with up-to-date security specs such as NIST SP800-90Ar1/B/C, FIPS-140-2, and ANSI X9.82.
发布评论
评论（4）
实际上英特尔已经实现了很多基于硬件的安全技术（芯片和芯片组）。
一些相关技术是：
一般来说，基于硬件的安全性更安全，因为几乎不可能“进入”您的代码（在较低的水平）。
Actually intel already implemented a lot of hardware-based security technologies (chip and chipset).
Some relevant technologies are:
In general, hardware-based security is more secure, because it is virtually impossible to 'go under' your code (tweak it at a lower level).
硬件级别的安全只能解决部分安全问题。例如，NX 区域使缓冲区溢出更难以利用（但并非不可能，返回到 libc）。您使用的 CPU 架构不会影响 SQL 注入等更常见的漏洞，我认为也不会。硬件中也可能存在漏洞，例如 Intel cpu 中的此漏洞。
英特尔希望让他们当前的产品更加安全。英特尔也有大量的储蓄，他们可能会将最近的这次收购视为对不断增长的领域的投资。
Hardware level security can only solve some security problems. For instance NX zones makes buffer overflows more difficult to exploit (but not impossible, return-to-libc). The cpu archatecture you are using isn't going to affect more common vulnerablites like SQL Injection and I don't think it can. There can also be vulnerabilities in hardware, for instance this vulnerability in Intel cpu's.
Intel wants to make their current products more secure. Intel also has a lot of money in savings and they might be looking at this recent purchase as an investment in a growing field.
该线程有点旧，但您还可以阅读英特尔安全密钥技术（随机数生成）内置于英特尔处理器（从 2012 代处理器开始）。实施指南详细介绍了它比随机数生成器更安全的原因。基于软件的实施。
This thread is a little old, but you can also read about the Intel Secure Key technology (Random Number generation) that is built into Intel processors (starting in 2012 generation processors.) The implementation guide goes into detail about what makes it more secure than a software-based implementation.
尽管这个帖子已经很老了，但我发现了一篇关于英特尔安全密钥的论文，其中描述了其随机数生成、安全性和性能方面。完整论文在这里（http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-4357/aa7ede/meta;jsessionid=A9DA9DDB925E6522D058F3CEEC7D0B21.ip-10-40-2-120），但非付费墙版本在这里（https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.02212）。
简而言之，我们拥有的最好的随机数生成技术是英特尔安全密钥，它使用 RdRand 和 RdSeed 指令集。它是一种加密安全的伪随机数生成器，使用片上熵源来随机播种数字生成器。它完全符合最新的安全规范，例如 NIST SP800-90Ar1/B/C、FIPS-140-2 和 ANSI X9.82。
Although this thread is pretty old, I came across a paper about Intel Secure Key that describes its random number generation, security, and performance aspects. The full paper is here (http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-4357/aa7ede/meta;jsessionid=A9DA9DDB925E6522D058F3CEEC7D0B21.ip-10-40-2-120), but the non-paywalled version is here (https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.02212).
In short, the best technology we have for random number generation is Intel Secure Key, which uses the RdRand and RdSeed instruction sets. It is a cryptographically-secure pseudorandom number generator that uses an on-chip entropy source to randomly seed the number generator. Its fully compliant with up-to-date security specs such as NIST SP800-90Ar1/B/C, FIPS-140-2, and ANSI X9.82.