Right, newer Core i3/i5/i7 chips support SGX; on the server-side, support is limited to the Xeon E3, which targets entry-level servers.
In order to use all of the features of SGX, a developer needs to obtain licensing from Intel. This agreement, combined with the DRM use case, has received mixed response. That said, there has been a flurry of academic papers ( https://github.com/vschiavoni/sgx-papers) exploring the technology. The use cases that I find interesting are: 1. storing a server's private key in the enclave, and, optionally, performing TLS termination within the enclave, thereby securing the session key. (See TaLos: https://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~fkelbert/papers/talos17.pdf) 2. Combining SGX with containers/unikernels/libOSes to add a degree of hardware isolation to what are often OS-level virtualization techniques. This is the topic of the SCONE and Haven papers. Thanks, Stephen On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 4:58 AM, Dmitry Salychev <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't believe that introduction of Intel SGX back in 2015, > and a W3C proposal of making DRM part of web standards is a > coincidence. It seems like a DRM lobby. >
