5 ms·

>the smallest percentage are willing to update firmware Not commenting on the broader issue, but this attitude has to change. Firmware updates cannot be seen a

>the smallest percentage are willing to update firmware Not commenting on the broader issue, but this attitude has to change. Firmware updates cannot be seen as optional anymore.

metadat 4y ago
Sometimes firmware updates make the system worse or even completely bricked. If the machine already working and stable, I've learned it's a risky / bad idea to eagerly apply firmware updates.
- bayindirh 4y ago
  Flash media is cheap nowadays, and HP EliteBook series laptops store a couple of previous BIOS versions on board to make rollback possible. Also these higher end laptops can try previous version of their firmware if they fail to boot with the latest one. Failing to see how Lenovo can't implement something like that.
  - TheBrokenRail 4y ago
    I know my ThinkPad gives me a "self-healing BIOS" message whenever I update the firmware (on a side note, fwupd is amazing), which according to Lenovo's Twitter is a BIOS backup (https://twitter.com/lenovo/status/1297785406239514624?lang=en https://twitter.com/lenovo/status/1297785406239514624?lang=e...).
- legalcorrection 4y ago
  Bad idea because firmware bugs are a growing attack vector and you are leaving yourself exposed to known, easily-exploited vulnerabilities by not staying up to date.
phkahler 4y ago
Firmware should have a physical switch to enable updating it. Fuck self checked signatures. There, fixed all the BIOS and firmware exploits for you. You're welcome.
- legalcorrection 4y ago
  That only works for IT-managed devices (and even then, is very expensive in terms of labor). Consumer devices need auto-update to protect them from known vulnerabilities. Auto-update is hard to get right, but your product is defective by design if it doesn't support it.
  - phkahler 4y ago
    You can auto-update AND tell the user to flip the switch as part of the update process.
- downrightmike 4y ago
  It is possible https://hackernoon.com/how-the-nintendo-switch-prevents-downgrades-by-irreparably-blowing-its-own-fuses-884bd3b7a8ba https://hackernoon.com/how-the-nintendo-switch-prevents-down...
- mjg59 4y ago
  Firmware vulnerabilities aren't necessarily used to target the firmware or to try to gain persistence - vulnerabilities in SMM handlers, for instance, can be used for privilege escalation at runtime.
  - R0b0t1 4y ago
    That is true, but disabling firmware update (should) limit the available persistence for the malware.
    - mjg59 4y ago
      Limit, but it doesn't remove all avenues of attack. Firmware config needs to be writable at runtime (things like cold boot attack protection require state to persist over power cycles, even if you don't think other firmware config should be modifiable without physical presence), and the code that parses that could still contain vulnerabilities. Making firmware mostly read-only would mitigate certain classes of attack, but not all of them.

>the smallest percentage are willing to update firmware Not commenting on the broader issue, but this attitude has to change. Firmware updates cannot be seen as optional anymore.

metadat 4y ago

Sometimes firmware updates make the system worse or even completely bricked. If the machine already working and stable, I've learned it's a risky / bad idea to eagerly apply firmware updates.

bayindirh 4y ago
Flash media is cheap nowadays, and HP EliteBook series laptops store a couple of previous BIOS versions on board to make rollback possible. Also these higher end laptops can try previous version of their firmware if they fail to boot with the latest one. Failing to see how Lenovo can't implement something like that.
- TheBrokenRail 4y ago
  I know my ThinkPad gives me a "self-healing BIOS" message whenever I update the firmware (on a side note, fwupd is amazing), which according to Lenovo's Twitter is a BIOS backup (https://twitter.com/lenovo/status/1297785406239514624?lang=en https://twitter.com/lenovo/status/1297785406239514624?lang=e...).
legalcorrection 4y ago
Bad idea because firmware bugs are a growing attack vector and you are leaving yourself exposed to known, easily-exploited vulnerabilities by not staying up to date.

phkahler 4y ago

Firmware should have a physical switch to enable updating it. Fuck self checked signatures. There, fixed all the BIOS and firmware exploits for you. You're welcome.

legalcorrection 4y ago
That only works for IT-managed devices (and even then, is very expensive in terms of labor). Consumer devices need auto-update to protect them from known vulnerabilities. Auto-update is hard to get right, but your product is defective by design if it doesn't support it.
- phkahler 4y ago
  You can auto-update AND tell the user to flip the switch as part of the update process.
downrightmike 4y ago
It is possible https://hackernoon.com/how-the-nintendo-switch-prevents-downgrades-by-irreparably-blowing-its-own-fuses-884bd3b7a8ba https://hackernoon.com/how-the-nintendo-switch-prevents-down...
mjg59 4y ago
Firmware vulnerabilities aren't necessarily used to target the firmware or to try to gain persistence - vulnerabilities in SMM handlers, for instance, can be used for privilege escalation at runtime.
- R0b0t1 4y ago
  That is true, but disabling firmware update (should) limit the available persistence for the malware.
  - mjg59 4y ago
    Limit, but it doesn't remove all avenues of attack. Firmware config needs to be writable at runtime (things like cold boot attack protection require state to persist over power cycles, even if you don't think other firmware config should be modifiable without physical presence), and the code that parses that could still contain vulnerabilities. Making firmware mostly read-only would mitigate certain classes of attack, but not all of them.