> Dude, put down the tripcode and take a deep breath. Like I said, this isn't slashdot.
You're right, it isn't. So why the patronizing tone?
> Reverse engineering a modern microprocessor is cheaper than building one from scratch.
Yet it's still expensive, and only becoming more so. Make it expensive enough and protected by a legal framework, and then what?
> a TPM analogue
Analogue could mean anything. A strong implementation is strong, and weak is weak. It looks like PSP's wasn't strong enough, which says little about future attempts.
> using an "onion" model
An onion or ring model makes a poor security architecture since it violates the principle of least privilege.
> some MIT dude puts a FPGA-based bus analyzer on top of the cpu-to-northbridge wires and BOOM.
Yes, which says something about that particular implementation. There is no reason why a bus cannot one day have strong encryption. Cracking open chips means a lot fewer MIT dudes.
> then you'd have issues with algorithm level bugs
Yes, which is why the principle of least privilege exists. Use a formally proven security kernel to enforce permissions.
> It's like putting a lock on the front door.
Indeed, but if you make a house difficult enough to break into, it's unlikely to happen. Consider the difference between your home and the proverbial Fort Knox, yet both use doors and locks.