• T. Hex@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    16 hours ago

    I think the phrase “running in the TEE” is the idiomatic way to describe a program running on the main CPU, attested by the TEE processor, and protected/isolated from other processes on the system (modulo exploits, lol). I’m vaguely familiar with AMD’s SEV-SNP, mainly from reading security papers rather than any hands-on experience. I make no claims about Apple’s Secure Enclave, though.

    • ozymandias117@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      16 hours ago

      I very much disagree with

      think the phrase “running in the TEE” is the idiomatic way to describe a program running on the main CPU

      In the Confidentiality/Integrity/Availability triangle, a secondary process running in another operating system gives you integrity, but not confidentiality

      • jivandabeast@lemmy.browntown.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        15 hours ago

        You both should just read the docs

        https://docs.darkbloom.dev/security/overview

        They lay out all the protections they have in place to ensure private prompt execution. The TEE is used to validate the integrity of the binary, and they use other protections like E2EE, SEV-SNP on the coordinator, MacOS security protections (hardened runtime, SIP, kernel protections, etc), plus (from what i can tell an optional enrollment from providers) in Apple’s MDM which makes Apple verify the integrity of the system.

        • ozymandias117@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          15 hours ago

          That’s literally what I said, and why I disagreed with the other poster saying it ran in the TEE

          Whether the protections of the main binary are sufficient I’ve made no comment on