5 ms·

Many people are saying "just use Linux" or "always do a clean install of Windows on a new laptop." However, that's no guarantee to help you escape this kind of

by sspiff 11y ago

Many people are saying "just use Linux" or "always do a clean install of Windows on a new laptop." However, that's no guarantee to help you escape this kind of malware. Even if you replace the hard drive and put an open source OS on a laptop, you're still booting from an increasingly complex, opaque blob of UEFI firmware that you can't get rid off in most consumer devices. Who knows what goes on in there? Then you've got the NIC firmware, the TPM (which is basically an entirely separate computer), and for corporate laptops often Intel's vPro stack as well. Realistically, if a vendor wants to track or trick you, they'll always have the means to do so. And if the past few years have taught us anything, it's that they really want to track you.

algorias 11y ago
Many of us have laughed at Stallman at one point or another for his extreme paranoia. But this is something he saw coming miles ahead. Not so funny anymore.
- pjmlp 11y ago
  I never understood that attitude. Without his work GNU/Linux would never have happened, yet many that criticize him enjoy using GNU/Linux. Back then it was not clear if *BSD would manage to win the court case from AT&T.
pdkl95 11y ago
The TPM just sores keys. Intel's "Active Management Technology" (the OS in vPro) is a serious problem. Igor Skochinsky's talk[1] about this is very troubling. The final piece of the puzzle is the new "Software Guard Extensions" in Intel's latest CPUs. This is clearly designed to protect SMM[2]. It is going to be a lot harder to "root" this stuff when the RAM is encrypted. [1] http://www.slideshare.net/codeblue_jp/igor-skochinsky-enpub http://www.slideshare.net/codeblue_jp/igor-skochinsky-enpub https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2_-VXz9E-w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2_-VXz9E-w [2]...and DRM in general. See this diagram of GlobalPlatform's "Trusted Execution Environment"; in particular, note how the "Rich OS" (windows, linux, etc) is allowed to run outside the chain of trust, with the DRM being protected by hardware. http://i.imgur.com/rjbzWyB.jpg http://i.imgur.com/rjbzWyB.jpg
- pjmlp 11y ago
  Some of the new extensions are also intended as yet another band aid against C style memory corruption.
  - pdkl95 11y ago
    You only need a memory manager for pointer protection. Intel states their intent for SGX on their website[1]. Some of the more important goals are: 1. Allow application developers to protect sensitive data from unauthorized access or modification by rogue software running at higher privilege levels. ... 5. Enable the development of trusted applications [...] 6, Enable software vendors to deliver trusted applications and updates [...] ... 8. Enable applications to define secure regions of code and data that maintain confidentiality even when an attacker has physical control of the platform and can conduct direct attacks on memory. This isn't about buffer overflows. You don't need to create a system where software vendors can create regions of memory that are protected against a logic analyser or cold boot attack to fix C style pointer bugs. You do need this capability if you want to hide things from the owner of the computer. It's not like they are hiding anything - "trusted applications" has been a dog whistle for DRM at least since "Palladium" (later called "Next-Generation Secure Computing Base"), part of Microsoft's "Trustworthy Computing" plans ~15 years ago. [1] https://software.intel.com/en-us/blogs/2013/09/26/protecting-application-secrets-with-intel-sgx https://software.intel.com/en-us/blogs/2013/09/26/protecting...
    - pc2g4d 11y ago
      Aren't there also legitimate use cases for these things? E.g. a password manager loading itself into a confidential memory region to prevent infiltration?
      - josteink 11y ago
        That may be, bit I'm absolutely confident it is perfect for malware and spyware too.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
viraptor 11y ago
I'm all for healthy paranoia, but some things you mention don't seem to have changed really. Uefi is just as opaque as BIOS - why not mention both? TPM is just a tool. It can be used for DRM, it can be used for safer full disk encryption (keeping keys out of the readable memory). Firmware is just a cheaper and updatable version of original purpose-designed, or factory-programmed ROM chips - they have the same capabilities for messing with you (from the producer's point of view). It really bothers me when people assign this to new technologies in general. Yes, some are actually new in desktops, like SMM. But most have been there for ages and just got an updated name or architecture.

by sspiff 11y ago

algorias 11y ago

Many of us have laughed at Stallman at one point or another for his extreme paranoia. But this is something he saw coming miles ahead. Not so funny anymore.

pjmlp 11y ago
I never understood that attitude. Without his work GNU/Linux would never have happened, yet many that criticize him enjoy using GNU/Linux. Back then it was not clear if *BSD would manage to win the court case from AT&T.

pdkl95 11y ago

The TPM just sores keys. Intel's "Active Management Technology" (the OS in vPro) is a serious problem. Igor Skochinsky's talk[1] about this is very troubling. The final piece of the puzzle is the new "Software Guard Extensions" in Intel's latest CPUs. This is clearly designed to protect SMM[2]. It is going to be a lot harder to "root" this stuff when the RAM is encrypted. [1] http://www.slideshare.net/codeblue_jp/igor-skochinsky-enpub http://www.slideshare.net/codeblue_jp/igor-skochinsky-enpub https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2_-VXz9E-w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2_-VXz9E-w [2]...and DRM in general. See this diagram of GlobalPlatform's "Trusted Execution Environment"; in particular, note how the "Rich OS" (windows, linux, etc) is allowed to run outside the chain of trust, with the DRM being protected by hardware. http://i.imgur.com/rjbzWyB.jpg http://i.imgur.com/rjbzWyB.jpg

pjmlp 11y ago
Some of the new extensions are also intended as yet another band aid against C style memory corruption.
- pdkl95 11y ago
  You only need a memory manager for pointer protection. Intel states their intent for SGX on their website[1]. Some of the more important goals are: 1. Allow application developers to protect sensitive data from unauthorized access or modification by rogue software running at higher privilege levels. ... 5. Enable the development of trusted applications [...] 6, Enable software vendors to deliver trusted applications and updates [...] ... 8. Enable applications to define secure regions of code and data that maintain confidentiality even when an attacker has physical control of the platform and can conduct direct attacks on memory. This isn't about buffer overflows. You don't need to create a system where software vendors can create regions of memory that are protected against a logic analyser or cold boot attack to fix C style pointer bugs. You do need this capability if you want to hide things from the owner of the computer. It's not like they are hiding anything - "trusted applications" has been a dog whistle for DRM at least since "Palladium" (later called "Next-Generation Secure Computing Base"), part of Microsoft's "Trustworthy Computing" plans ~15 years ago. [1] https://software.intel.com/en-us/blogs/2013/09/26/protecting-application-secrets-with-intel-sgx https://software.intel.com/en-us/blogs/2013/09/26/protecting...
  - pc2g4d 11y ago
    Aren't there also legitimate use cases for these things? E.g. a password manager loading itself into a confidential memory region to prevent infiltration?
    - josteink 11y ago
      That may be, bit I'm absolutely confident it is perfect for malware and spyware too.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

viraptor 11y ago

I'm all for healthy paranoia, but some things you mention don't seem to have changed really. Uefi is just as opaque as BIOS - why not mention both? TPM is just a tool. It can be used for DRM, it can be used for safer full disk encryption (keeping keys out of the readable memory). Firmware is just a cheaper and updatable version of original purpose-designed, or factory-programmed ROM chips - they have the same capabilities for messing with you (from the producer's point of view). It really bothers me when people assign this to new technologies in general. Yes, some are actually new in desktops, like SMM. But most have been there for ages and just got an updated name or architecture.