That is nice speed-up compared to generic hardware but everyone probably wants to know how much slower it is than performing same operations on plain text data? I am sure 50% penalty is acceptable, 95% is probably not.
This hardware won’t make the technique attractive for ALL computation. But, it could dramatically increase the range of applications.
That rules out anything latency-sensitive, but for batch workloads like aggregating encrypted medical records or running simple ML inference on private data it starts to become practical. The real unlock is not raw speed parity but getting FHE fast enough that you can justify the privacy tradeoff for specific regulated workloads.
There are two, non-exclusive paths I'm thinking at the moment:
1. DRM: Might this enable a next level of DRM?
2. Hardware attestation: Might this enable a deeper level of hardware attestation?
It's not related to DRM or trusted computing.
A: "Intel/AMD is adding instructions to accelerate AES"
B: "Might this enable a next level of DRM? Might this enable a deeper level of hardware attestation?"
A: "wtf are you talking about? It's just instructions to make certain types of computations faster, it has nothing to do with DRM or hardware attestation."
B: "Not yet."
I'm sure in some way it probably helps DRM or hardware attestation to some extent, but not any more than say, 3nm process node helps DRM or hardware attestation by making it faster.
Same here.
Can't wait to KYC myself in order to use a CPU.
We are not anymore their clients, we are just another product to sell. So, they do not design chips for us but for the benefit of other corporations.
3. Unskippable ads with data gathering at the CPU level.
I remember how thinking how fun it was! I could see unfolded before me how there would be endless ways to configure, reconfigure, optimize, etc.
I know there are a few open source chip efforts, but wondering maybe now is the time to pull the community together and organize more intentionally around that. Maybe open source chipsets won't be as fast as their corporate counterparts, but I think we are definitely at an inflection point now in society where we would need this to maintain freedom.
If anyone is working in that area, I am very interested. I am very green, but still have the old textbooks I could dust off (just don't have the ole college provided mentor graphics -- or I guess siemens now -- design tool anymore).
I think eGovernment is the main use case: not super high traffic (we're not voting every day), but very high privacy expectations.
[1] https://confer.to/blog/2025/12/confessions-to-a-data-lake/
If computation can happen directly on encrypted data, does that reduce the need for trusted environments like SGX/TEE, or does it mostly complement them?
esseph•1h ago
If you need to trust the encryption and trust the hardware itself, it may not be suitable for your environment/ threat model.
gruez•1h ago
Are we reading the same article? It's talking about homorphic encryption, ie. doing mathematical operations on already encrypted data, without being aware of its cleartext contents. It's not related to SGX or other trusted computing technologies.
cwmma•1h ago
esseph•3m ago
u1hcw9nx•1h ago
First you encrypt the data. Then you send it to hardware to compute, get result back and decrypt it.