The document mentions:
The only current known defense against chip attacks is trying to make the cost of a chip attack as high as possible. To make things worst
This argument is valid, so why is it written (To make things worst). Especially if you consider the Bitcoin model. Bitcoin, besides being based on software, it has an economy behinds it. Bitcoin can be destroyed using economic resources. There are calculations around this:
https://cryptopotato.com/this-is-how-much-you-would-need-to-spend-to-execute-51-attacks-on-bitcoin-and-ethereum/
I do think there needs to be a calculus on how much $ would cost to a chip attack.
There's a possibility that using physics we don't need to rely in an economic incentive, but for now even Bitcoin relies on it.
The document mentions:
The only current known defense against chip attacks is trying to make the cost of a chip attack as high as possible. To make things worst
This argument is valid, so why is it written (To make things worst). Especially if you consider the Bitcoin model. Bitcoin, besides being based on software, it has an economy behinds it. Bitcoin can be destroyed using economic resources. There are calculations around this:
https://cryptopotato.com/this-is-how-much-you-would-need-to-spend-to-execute-51-attacks-on-bitcoin-and-ethereum/
I do think there needs to be a calculus on how much $ would cost to a chip attack.
There's a possibility that using physics we don't need to rely in an economic incentive, but for now even Bitcoin relies on it.