4 ms·
Security is a cost center and most OEMs run on margins too thin to bother with security patches even if they cared. Most simply don’t care. I think that su
by devy 9y ago
Security is a cost center and most OEMs run on margins too thin
to bother with security patches even if they cared. Most simply don’t care.
I think that sums up pretty well why downstream vendors are treating security casually. So the billion dollar question is, how do we fix this, as a tech community?
- thraway2016 9y agoThis is an unpopular position, but approaches like BrickerBot are likely to be effective.
- na85 9y agoI'm not sure the tech community is able to fix this, short of the brickerbot mentioned by another poster. Frankly, I think this situation will only resolve if and only if there are dire financial consequences to OEMs that pay lip service to security.
- dom0 9y agoOEMs are not involved at all with ME afaik, it's exculusively controlled by Intel.
- wmf 9y agoOEMs have to ship ME firmware updates; Intel has no way to get them to you directly.
- cynix 9y agoCan't they install an update remotely via this vulnerability? :p
- etherealG 9y agoNo joke, this would be the best thing for everyone. Especially if we find a way to do it ourselves rather than wait for a vendor to. I've been thinking for years about writing a virus that patches the vulnerability it used to spread as it goes.
- 5ilv3r 9y agoOpen architectures are a solution, even if there is no single common solution. Diversity is something we have been missing since windows became popular, and although security through obscurity is not a strategy, diversity certainly serves well at limiting the scope of damage possible for a single attack.