zlacker

> True, there is a number of conditions that can warn us that the system is compromised, but there is no limit on the number of checks that a system must pass in order to be deemed “clean”.

This is wrong. A computers behaviour, even if allowed to access "true randomness", can be determined in finitely many steps. Sure, the upper bound to the number of steps is unfeasibly big, but not without limit.

Practically, there might be no difference if you assume there is no limit, but excluding the possibility seems u justified.