The way I see it: Whatever happens, the system will get abused, and so, I weigh the potential abuses along with the potential benefits. With remote attestation, you put a lot of control in the hands whoever controls the "remote", making the situation very asymmetrical, and so, ripe for centralized abuse. For example, with centralized trust systems, a leak of the signing keys are devastating for the system. For an example, see the DVD key leak:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AACS_encryption_key_controvers...