5 ms·

This isn't a blow to real security, just to DRM and treacherous computing. There's no legitimate security from "Secure" Boot.

bawolff 4y ago
Evil maids?
- Filligree 4y ago
  How many of us have maids? How many of those maids are evil?
  - ghostpepper 4y ago
    "Evil maid" is a generic descriptor for any number of attacks that can be performed with physical access to a device. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evil_maid_attack https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evil_maid_attack "The name refers to the scenario where a maid could subvert a device left unattended in a hotel room – but the concept itself also applies to situations such as a device being intercepted while in transit, or taken away temporarily by airport or law enforcement personnel. "
    - codedokode 4y ago
      With physical access you can simply install a keylogger, GPS tracker, and maybe something worse (malicious PCI-Express or USB device for example).
    - guilhas 4y ago
      Still, how real of a threat that is for 99% of computer users? And law enforcement will have a device to bypass most devices security
      - Avamander 4y ago
        > And law enforcement will have a device to bypass most devices security What makes you say that and how is that an excuse to do nothing?
        guilhas 4y ago
        To prevent against a evil maid attack you would need to encrypt your drive In case of a malfunction, you risk loosing all your data Threat actors and law enforcement can bypass it UEFI threats moving to the ESP: Introducing ESPecter bootkit https://www.welivesecurity.com/2021/10/05/uefi-threats-moving-esp-introducing-especter-bootkit/ https://www.welivesecurity.com/2021/10/05/uefi-threats-movin...
      - bawolff 4y ago
        Its definitely on the high end of attacks and a bit unlikely, but i dont think its exclusively nation states. Well within the reach of thieves who want to steal your bank info or something.
      - tkngctrl 4y ago
        [flagged]
    - ngneer 4y ago
      I genuinely hate this "cute" yet condescending name. Maids are on the low skill low wage end of the spectrum. Even if there is a motive to mount a physical attack, possibly a targeted one, it will either be performed by a person impersonating a maid or with the help of an operator giving instructions. So, either an "evil" maid who is not really evil, or an evil "maid" who is not really a maid. Contrived, inaccurate and demeaning.
      - bawolff 4y ago
        This seems to sell maids a little short. I'm sure maids are just as capable of being script kiddies as anyone else.
        account42 4y ago
        Most people don't choose low paying physically demanding jobs when they can paste together stack overflow answers. That said, "Evil Maid" fits here because of that - they are no someone that you expect to need technical protections from but theoretically they could be a genious adversary or just hired by one.
        ngneer 4y ago
        I tend to agree with your analysis. But that is precisely my beef with the term. You seem to be saying that the term fits _because_ it describes a population that violates security expectation, _because_ it is "generally not smart, except for theoretical surprises" or "easy to hire for nefarious purpose". Neither one is very flattering, neither one equates to "evil" and neither one applies specifically to maids. A neutral term would have been an "adversary with temporary physical access" but that is not nearly as catchy.
  - zirgs 4y ago
    Pretty much all offices have them.
  - lostmsu 4y ago
    Do you take your laptop with you when going to a Starbucks restroom?
    - josephcsible 4y ago
      ...Yes? Not because of the risk of evil maid attacks, but because of the risk someone will just steal it.
- happymellon 4y ago
  I agree that this is the reason, but having Intel as the guard only makes it so that it could have already been hacked/leaked/bypassed and you never know. At least if it was user controlled we can ensure that other people's leaked keys don't bypass our security.
  - charcircuit 4y ago
    If it's user controlled what stops an attacker from bypassing it as the "user"? Most people just want to have a secure device and will not think about security, not want to do any work to secure their device.
- AshamedCaptain 4y ago
  There was this recent article (here in HN) about these "evil public charging ports that can hack your smartphone" and how there is an entire ecosystem of devices to protect against them.... when in practice no one has heard about any one single example of such evil charging port, and that in practice carrying out such attack is so target-specific and leaves so many warnings signs that the entire thing sounds implausible to say the least. These evil maids are even more implausible than that. Has to be ridiculously targeted. If you are really targeted by such a powerful state-like entity, wouldn't it make much more sense for them to just send a NSA letter to Intel (or whatever the weakest link in your chain is, and there are plenty of extremely weak chains here, like the BIOS manufacturer) and/or backdoor the hell out of it? Secure Boot was never about security for normal users nor security for the majority of us. This is like https://xkcd.com/1200/ https://xkcd.com/1200/ all over again. At the point the attacker can write arbitrary bytes to your hard disk, its way past the point where the majority of users care.
  - its-summertime 4y ago
    EM isn't needfully a targeted attack: almost everyone is running x86_64 it'd just be a matter of replacing a binary with a iffy'd version that runs before any decryption happens, e.g. replacing plymouth. This isn't hard to do in the slightest? I think even you or I could do it. But with secureboot, replacing a binary in the loading chain isn't an option. I don't think I could convince intel to install a bug for me. https://blog.invisiblethings.org/2011/09/07/anti-evil-maid.html https://blog.invisiblethings.org/2011/09/07/anti-evil-maid.h... is a good descriptor of how it all comes together
    - AshamedCaptain 4y ago
      All smartphones use ARM and USB and Android, and _even then_ the evil USB charging port is targeted -- you still have to tailor it to the target's screen ratio, Android version, Android UI/skin, even launcher if they have one, etc. > it'd just be a matter of replacing a binary with a iffy'd version that runs before any decryption happens, e.g. replacing plymouth. You'd at least need to imitate the UI your target is using for unlocking the disk (e.g. plymouth theme). Then, after the user types something, either virtualize the rest of the boot process (which is already extremely implausible), or otherwise reboot in a way that does not immediately cause the user to be suspicious. All of this is as targeted as it gets. A generic version would get as far as your average phishing email. But... how do you plan to replace my bootloader in the first place? You'd need root access for that. At that point, it is already game over for the target! Why would you need to tamper with the bootloader at that point? Or are you thinking about breaking into my house and do that in my offline computers ? How is that not a "targeted attack" ?
- hlandau 4y ago
  Can you explain how Intel Bootguard usefully guards against evil maids?
- stefan_ 4y ago
  So the maid swaps your keyboard instead. There is no winning in this scenario, and it certainly isn't through "Secure Boot".
- fsflover 4y ago
  I'm using a TPM with a Liberm Key on my laptop to defend from the Evil Maid attack. All keys are my own.
sockaddr 4y ago
> treacherous computing I like it, going to hang on to this one
- josephcsible 4y ago
  Credit goes to Richard Stallman: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/can-you-trust.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/can-you-trust.en.html

bawolff 4y ago

Evil maids?

Filligree 4y ago
How many of us have maids? How many of those maids are evil?
- ghostpepper 4y ago
  "Evil maid" is a generic descriptor for any number of attacks that can be performed with physical access to a device. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evil_maid_attack https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evil_maid_attack "The name refers to the scenario where a maid could subvert a device left unattended in a hotel room – but the concept itself also applies to situations such as a device being intercepted while in transit, or taken away temporarily by airport or law enforcement personnel. "
  - codedokode 4y ago
    With physical access you can simply install a keylogger, GPS tracker, and maybe something worse (malicious PCI-Express or USB device for example).
  - guilhas 4y ago
    Still, how real of a threat that is for 99% of computer users? And law enforcement will have a device to bypass most devices security
    - Avamander 4y ago
      > And law enforcement will have a device to bypass most devices security What makes you say that and how is that an excuse to do nothing?
      - guilhas 4y ago
        To prevent against a evil maid attack you would need to encrypt your drive In case of a malfunction, you risk loosing all your data Threat actors and law enforcement can bypass it UEFI threats moving to the ESP: Introducing ESPecter bootkit https://www.welivesecurity.com/2021/10/05/uefi-threats-moving-esp-introducing-especter-bootkit/ https://www.welivesecurity.com/2021/10/05/uefi-threats-movin...
    - bawolff 4y ago
      Its definitely on the high end of attacks and a bit unlikely, but i dont think its exclusively nation states. Well within the reach of thieves who want to steal your bank info or something.
    - tkngctrl 4y ago
      [flagged]
  - ngneer 4y ago
    I genuinely hate this "cute" yet condescending name. Maids are on the low skill low wage end of the spectrum. Even if there is a motive to mount a physical attack, possibly a targeted one, it will either be performed by a person impersonating a maid or with the help of an operator giving instructions. So, either an "evil" maid who is not really evil, or an evil "maid" who is not really a maid. Contrived, inaccurate and demeaning.
    - bawolff 4y ago
      This seems to sell maids a little short. I'm sure maids are just as capable of being script kiddies as anyone else.
      - account42 4y ago
        Most people don't choose low paying physically demanding jobs when they can paste together stack overflow answers. That said, "Evil Maid" fits here because of that - they are no someone that you expect to need technical protections from but theoretically they could be a genious adversary or just hired by one.
        ngneer 4y ago
        I tend to agree with your analysis. But that is precisely my beef with the term. You seem to be saying that the term fits _because_ it describes a population that violates security expectation, _because_ it is "generally not smart, except for theoretical surprises" or "easy to hire for nefarious purpose". Neither one is very flattering, neither one equates to "evil" and neither one applies specifically to maids. A neutral term would have been an "adversary with temporary physical access" but that is not nearly as catchy.
- zirgs 4y ago
  Pretty much all offices have them.
- lostmsu 4y ago
  Do you take your laptop with you when going to a Starbucks restroom?
  - josephcsible 4y ago
    ...Yes? Not because of the risk of evil maid attacks, but because of the risk someone will just steal it.
happymellon 4y ago
I agree that this is the reason, but having Intel as the guard only makes it so that it could have already been hacked/leaked/bypassed and you never know. At least if it was user controlled we can ensure that other people's leaked keys don't bypass our security.
- charcircuit 4y ago
  If it's user controlled what stops an attacker from bypassing it as the "user"? Most people just want to have a secure device and will not think about security, not want to do any work to secure their device.
AshamedCaptain 4y ago
There was this recent article (here in HN) about these "evil public charging ports that can hack your smartphone" and how there is an entire ecosystem of devices to protect against them.... when in practice no one has heard about any one single example of such evil charging port, and that in practice carrying out such attack is so target-specific and leaves so many warnings signs that the entire thing sounds implausible to say the least. These evil maids are even more implausible than that. Has to be ridiculously targeted. If you are really targeted by such a powerful state-like entity, wouldn't it make much more sense for them to just send a NSA letter to Intel (or whatever the weakest link in your chain is, and there are plenty of extremely weak chains here, like the BIOS manufacturer) and/or backdoor the hell out of it? Secure Boot was never about security for normal users nor security for the majority of us. This is like https://xkcd.com/1200/ https://xkcd.com/1200/ all over again. At the point the attacker can write arbitrary bytes to your hard disk, its way past the point where the majority of users care.
- its-summertime 4y ago
  EM isn't needfully a targeted attack: almost everyone is running x86_64 it'd just be a matter of replacing a binary with a iffy'd version that runs before any decryption happens, e.g. replacing plymouth. This isn't hard to do in the slightest? I think even you or I could do it. But with secureboot, replacing a binary in the loading chain isn't an option. I don't think I could convince intel to install a bug for me. https://blog.invisiblethings.org/2011/09/07/anti-evil-maid.html https://blog.invisiblethings.org/2011/09/07/anti-evil-maid.h... is a good descriptor of how it all comes together
  - AshamedCaptain 4y ago
    All smartphones use ARM and USB and Android, and _even then_ the evil USB charging port is targeted -- you still have to tailor it to the target's screen ratio, Android version, Android UI/skin, even launcher if they have one, etc. > it'd just be a matter of replacing a binary with a iffy'd version that runs before any decryption happens, e.g. replacing plymouth. You'd at least need to imitate the UI your target is using for unlocking the disk (e.g. plymouth theme). Then, after the user types something, either virtualize the rest of the boot process (which is already extremely implausible), or otherwise reboot in a way that does not immediately cause the user to be suspicious. All of this is as targeted as it gets. A generic version would get as far as your average phishing email. But... how do you plan to replace my bootloader in the first place? You'd need root access for that. At that point, it is already game over for the target! Why would you need to tamper with the bootloader at that point? Or are you thinking about breaking into my house and do that in my offline computers ? How is that not a "targeted attack" ?
hlandau 4y ago
Can you explain how Intel Bootguard usefully guards against evil maids?
stefan_ 4y ago
So the maid swaps your keyboard instead. There is no winning in this scenario, and it certainly isn't through "Secure Boot".
fsflover 4y ago
I'm using a TPM with a Liberm Key on my laptop to defend from the Evil Maid attack. All keys are my own.

sockaddr 4y ago

> treacherous computing I like it, going to hang on to this one

josephcsible 4y ago
Credit goes to Richard Stallman: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/can-you-trust.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/can-you-trust.en.html