"Thus, while certain portions of the Baochip-1x SoC are closed-source, none of them are involved in the transformation of data. In other words, all the closed source components are effectively “wires”: the data that goes in on one side should match the data coming out the other side. While this is dissatisfying from the “absolute trust” perspective – one can’t definitively rule out the possibility of back doors in black-box wires – we can inspect its perimeter and confirm that, for a broad range of possibilities, it behaves correctly. It’s not perfect transparency, but it’s far better than the fully-NDA SoCs we currently use to handle our secrets, and more importantly, it allows us to start writing code for open architectures, paving a road towards an eventually fully-open silicon-to-software future."
bunnielabs strikes again
a small step on the slow road to open hardware so we can (some day in the future) build hardware wallets and signing devices, the right way. IIUC.
how does this compare with something like tropic square from trezor?
"The Baochip-1x developers claim that closed-source components are harmless as long as they act as 'wires' (Input = Output). Seriously?
We live in an era where people run Doom on a pregnancy test. Anyone who believes a SoC segment is 'too dumb' to spy is playing 2D chess on a 4D board. 🛡️
A chip doesn't need active data transformation to be a backdoor. It just needs enough compute power for a trigger or a side-channel attack. You can monitor the 'perimeter' all you want, but you won't see the hardware Trojans sleeping at the silicon level.
As long as silicon remains a black box, any exit strategy (BTC) is built on sand. Physics beats blind trust—every single time. Who here actually trusts 'semi-open' hardware?"
Signing devices are only as strong as the silicon they're printed on. If the chip is a black box, your private keys are never truly yours. Baochip is a bridge to a future where we don't have to 'hope' our hardware isn't backdoored. Absolute signal.