> Wanting to be able to ensure firmware isn't maliciously modified is a good thing.
I'm not sure it's a good thing at its core. The intent seems legit on the surface, but digging into the implementation you'll always end up having an adversarial relation with your user's security and device ownership.
On games, I kinda see this as an argument for preserving a special status for consoles, where the maker keep a right to secure everything to insane levels. Doing the same on general purpose computing platform isn't acceptable. Banking and digital currencies are morr of a blurry line, but games definitely shouldn't be accessing the utter most secure system of the platform.
If anything, opening the door to a whole community to hack the base security of your computing life when litteral life and death applications also rely on those shouldn't be allowed.
I'm not sure it's a good thing at its core. The intent seems legit on the surface, but digging into the implementation you'll always end up having an adversarial relation with your user's security and device ownership.
On games, I kinda see this as an argument for preserving a special status for consoles, where the maker keep a right to secure everything to insane levels. Doing the same on general purpose computing platform isn't acceptable. Banking and digital currencies are morr of a blurry line, but games definitely shouldn't be accessing the utter most secure system of the platform.
If anything, opening the door to a whole community to hack the base security of your computing life when litteral life and death applications also rely on those shouldn't be allowed.