3 ms·
The labs team at work wrote a bit [0] about why this is over-hyped (more context in the full post): > Arbitrary code execution is bad! But exploiting this vuln
by eatonphil 7y ago
The labs team at work wrote a bit [0] about why this is over-hyped (more context in the full post):
> Arbitrary code execution is bad! But exploiting this vulnerability requires local access at a minimum, compounded by the attacker needing to exploit a relevant device to gain a foothold on the system. This list of valid footholds is quite limited. For instance, an attacker would need to perform code execution in the ISH or other Platform Controller Hub (PCH) devices — exploiting PCIe devices (like GPUs or RAID controllers) wouldn’t suffice. Additionally, per the original blog post, other methods of exploitation require physical access. Either way, this is limited to incredibly motivated and well-resourced attackers (like a nation-state with a high-value target identified).
[0] https://capsule8.com/blog/ramming-down-hype-via-intel-csme/ https://capsule8.com/blog/ramming-down-hype-via-intel-csme/
- nine_k 7y agoIt is limited to any well-monied adversary. So, every serious company should be concerned that their competition (maybe abroad) will be able to eventually decrypt a lost / stolen laptop with trade secrets. So every corporate laptop needs its full-disk encryption upgraded. It's large.
- gggmaster 7y agoSo this is a good feature for fighting against DRM.