This is interesting to me, because this is the same sort of thinking that led to the current iteration of Chrome OS devices. While not stateless entirely as the paper suggests, they clearly have the same train of thought. Without the developer switch flipped, verified boot should entrust that Google (and anyone with its private key) is the sole originator of the code on the device.<p>I wouldn&#x27;t suggest using a Chrome OS device for anything where opsec matters, but I find the similarities, at least in thought, striking. Chrome OS&#x27;s early security benefits were that the device could be trusted if the dev switch wasn&#x27;t flipped -- and it could be fully wiped and restored on demand if need be. The trusted stick described in the PDF would likely share similar characteristics as far as disposability goes.