Defcon Badges Include Open Source Chip That Doubles as Security Key

You are a Senior Editorial Writer and Editor-in-Chief for a major English-language digital publishing company. Write a complete, authoritative, and professionally structured article in English.

OUTPUT RULE: Return ONLY the final HTML article. No explanations. No comments. No notes. No text outside the article. No Markdown. No symbols like *, **, #.

INPUTS:
TITLE: Defcon Badges Pack Unique Open Source Chip That Doubles as Security Key
CONTENT:

It’s been a longtime feature of the annual Defcon hacker conference that attendees come away not only with knowledge of new software vulnerabilities and hacking techniques but also an elaborately designed conference badge—often electronic masterpieces embedded with intricate puzzles, complex crypto challenges, hidden Easter eggs, and even the mechanical gear trains of a watch.

Each year’s badge creator endeavors to top previous designs and blow the minds of hard-to-impress hackers. But this year’s badges take a different tack. Instead of the badge designs being the star, it’s what is inside the hardware that will really stand out.

This year, Defcon asked legendary hardware hacker Andrew “bunnie” Huang to create the badges—revealed here for the first time—and they include an innovative open source chip that Huang designed and that aims to do no less than advance the state of security, transparency, and trustworthiness in computing.

But the chip isn’t just part of the badge. Its core module can be removed and used after the conference as a hardware security token, giving the badge a second life beyond Defcon.

The chip—called the Baochip-1x—is a “mostly” open source microcontroller that has been three years in the making and fulfills Huang’s years-long dream of making a chip whose security is verifiable. Huang has published the source code for the Baochip’s operating system, firmware, processor core, cryptographic engines, and input-output system, on GitHub, making these components available for inspection and use.

The chip is also packaged so that researchers can peer inside to check the silicon itself and compare what they see against the published design, rather than having to trust that the manufactured chip is what the designers intended.

Computer chips are traditionally black-box components with an opaque casing that obscures their circuitry. Even previous open source chips that made their specs and code available for users to examine were encased in impermeable plastic, creating a supply-chain problem. Users had to trust that nothing changed during the manufacturing stage of the chip, such as a backdoor component being added to it.

Unlike conventional chips encased in opaque plastic, the Baochip is packaged so that infrared light can be shone through the back of the silicon, allowing the chip’s internal structures to be visually inspected.

Infrared image of the Baochip1x mounted on a circuit board.

figure

Huang plans to demonstrate the technique at the conference, allowing attendees to inspect the chip under an infrared light.

“I’ve been doing a bunch of stuff along the lines of trust and silicon and verification transparency” for years, Huang tells WIRED. “It’s all … this kind of story arc I’ve been on … to try and get a chip that we can trust down to the very core, down to the transistor … You can actually … see the RAM arrays … on the chip.”

Build-a-Chip

Building a new chip is an expensive project that can cost millions of dollars for fabrication. But Huang got a big break three years ago when a company called Crossbar reached out to him. The company wanted to create a new open source and secure chip but didn’t know how to go about it. Huang agreed to assist on one condition: that they let him piggyback on their manufacturing run by placing his CPU on their chip wafer, allowing both designs to share the same manufacturing run rather than requiring Huang to fund a separate run.

“They look at it as, if they put me on the chip, they get two products for the price of one,” Huang says. This kind of piggybacking is not unusual, he adds, though it’s not something the industry likes to discuss publicly.

LANGUAGE: Write entirely in English. Preserve proper nouns, brand names, product names, game titles, technologies, and technical terms exactly as written. Translate everything else naturally. Read as if written by a native English editor.

CONTENT SOURCE: Treat CONTENT as your primary factual source. Build the article from deep understanding of CONTENT. Do not mechanically expand the title.

CONTENT CLEANING: Remove website names, publication names, author credits, RSS labels, newsletter markers, syndication branding, generic labels (Summary, Highlights, Recap, Key Takeaways). Convert “according to X” into direct factual statements.

FACT PRESERVATION: Preserve exactly: names, brands, companies, products, games, technologies, dates, numbers, percentages, prices, technical specifications. Never distort facts.

WRITING STYLE: Natural, fluent, authoritative, engaging, analytical, trustworthy, nuanced. Blend factual reporting, explanation, contextualization, analysis, practical interpretation, and strategic insight. Vary paragraph length and sentence structure. Avoid robotic phrasing, repetition, clichés, promotional language, filler sentences.

ARTICLE LENGTH: Long-form, highly detailed. Target 1,500-3,500 words. Feel comprehensive and substantive. Never feel brief, superficial, or summary-like. Expand naturally with historical background, industry context, technical explanation, market implications, strategic significance, practical consequences, comparisons, future outlook — but only when content genuinely supports it.

STRUCTURE:
– Begin with a

introduction. No heading before the first paragraph.
– Introduction must hook the reader within 2-3 sentences.
– Use

,

only when they improve organization.
– Each section must introduce meaningful new information.
– Closing: end with a forward-looking, analytical, or practical paragraph.
– Never use generic closing headings like “Conclusion”, “Summary”, “Final Thoughts”, “Looking Ahead”, “What Comes Next”, “Takeaway”, “Key Points”.

HEADINGS: Write content first, then generate headings. Headings must be specific, concrete, informative, and editorial. They should reference actual events, features, numbers, dates, or companies. Support SEO naturally.

SEO + AEO + GEO + E-E-A-T:
– Integrate primary keyword naturally in first paragraph and in at least one h2.
– Use semantically related terms throughout.
– Anticipate questions English-speaking users would ask. Answer them directly: “What is…”, “How does…”, “Why did…”, “When did…”, “What are the…”
– At least one section must provide a clear, standalone answer (2-4 sentences) formatted for a featured snippet. Place the answer immediately after the question.
– Include geographic context only when directly relevant.
– Show expertise by explaining mechanisms, causes, and implications — not just stating facts.
– Build authority through precise, well-contextualized information.
– Establish trust through accurate facts, balanced tone, measured claims.
– Never write “experts say” or “studies show” without specific grounding in the content.

INTERNAL PROCESS (do not output this):
1. Analyze: content type, search intent, technical level, topic complexity
2. Determine ideal length (1,500-3,500 words based on complexity)
3. Adapt tone: Journalistic / Analytical / Explanatory / Consultative / Technical / Conversational Professional
4. Clean sources and preserve all facts
5. Write article with proper structure, headings, and AEO snippet
6. Validate: grammar, fluency, coherence, depth, no repetition, valid HTML, facts preserved, no generic headings

HTML RULES: Use ONLY: