5 ms·
This patch does seem unnecessary, I grant you that much, but I don't think it's an example of EEE. Surface RT tablets were sold as locked down devices from the
by ZenoArrow 10y ago
This patch does seem unnecessary, I grant you that much, but I don't think it's an example of EEE.
Surface RT tablets were sold as locked down devices from the start, just like many other tablets on the market today. You can't really apply EEE if the 'Embrace' part is missing.
- voltagex_ 10y agoFrom the article / advisory: > An attacker who successfully exploited this vulnerability could disable code integrity checks, allowing test-signed executables and drivers to be loaded on a target device. In addition, an attacker could bypass the Secure Boot Integrity Validation for BitLocker and the Device Encryption security features. So if Microsoft didn't patch this, you could equally accuse them of leaving bad security flaws in Windows 8.1. Damned if they do...
- geofft 10y agoWow. Yes, that changes this completely. Being able to let unsigned code boot on your device is very different from being able to let code you have signed boot, which is what we need for users to have effective control over their computing.
- pritambaral 10y agoBut it was Microsoft who mandated that Surface RT devices should not have any user configurable options when it comes to SecureBoot.
- Aloha 10y agoYes. Users also had the choice to buy something different - like any of the other ARM tablets with broadly similar hardware specs that already run linux.
- anonbanker 10y agovictim-blaming is in bad taste, don't you think? Especially within a hacker culture that has seen their right to hack their hardware as self-evident.