3 ms·
The most scary thing here is that in some cirsumstances it allows an attacker to make malicious code permanent: "This brings an amazing opportunity for an atta
by iliketosleep 9y ago
The most scary thing here is that in some cirsumstances it allows an attacker to make malicious code permanent:
"This brings an amazing opportunity for an attacker with capabilities to inject program code into BIOS: to turn Intel BG technology on manually making any modifications in BIOS permanent. It only requires configuring Intel BG by programming the chipset fuses (via pure software way) after the modification is done."
- userbinator 9y ago...and even manually reflashing the whole BIOS image with a hardware "chip clip" can't fix it? That is really scary. The only hope is that those "chipset fuses" actually can be reset via hardware (but not software, since that would defeat the point)... but that chance also seems slim. I'm probably one of the few people to which anything advertised as "trusted" or being for "security and safety" has, instead of implying peace and bliss, taken on a much more sinister connotation: to lock you out of what you own... boot guard, secure boot, SGX, etc. All in theory can be used for the user, but in practice are just enabling walled gardens and DRM.
- iliketosleep 9y agoYes, if it was truly for the security of the end users, they'd at least provide the end user a mechanism to unlock this stuff when things go wrong, such as a hardware jumper combined with software access code. A key principle of infosec is "availability" for authorized users. Therefore, I argue that such devices are not very secure for end users.