Timeline for Is ransomware that threatens with publication and verifiably deletes upon payment possible?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 18, 2017 at 1:55 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackSecurity/status/865022884921606144 | ||
| May 14, 2017 at 21:45 | comment | added | Out of Band | To be more specific: The real problem with your enclave idea is that you wouldn't find anyone you could trust who'd be willing to audit the enclave code and declare it trustworthy. Look at how few public security audits are done on important software. Look at how long Truecrypt went without one. I can't imagine anyone would be willing to do a security audit on ransomware, of all things. You'd be helping the bad guys if you declared it's trustworthy. | |
| May 14, 2017 at 20:19 | comment | added | Awn | I think this would have to rely on trust, as some answers have pointed out that it's not possible. If a particular ransomware variant has a reputation for being trustworthy, then I feel like it could work. Establishing this trustworthiness may be easier said than done though. | |
| May 14, 2017 at 19:49 | answer | added | Philipp | timeline score: 2 | |
| May 14, 2017 at 19:48 | answer | added | Out of Band | timeline score: 2 | |
| May 14, 2017 at 18:07 | review | First posts | |||
| May 14, 2017 at 18:15 | |||||
| May 14, 2017 at 18:06 | history | asked | Sami Liedes | CC BY-SA 3.0 |