3 ms·
UEFI is just another M$ abomination 8-( In this specific vulnerability, I wonder how possible it is to modify that boot logo remotely? Wouldn't exploiting thi
by johnea 3y ago
UEFI is just another M$ abomination 8-(
In this specific vulnerability, I wonder how possible it is to modify that boot logo remotely?
Wouldn't exploiting this vuln require local access?
As in all things, open firmware is the way to go:
https://www.linuxboot.org/ https://www.linuxboot.org/
https://libreboot.org/ https://libreboot.org/
https://www.coreboot.org/users.html https://www.coreboot.org/users.html
- forward1 3y agoDo Libreboot supported hardware devices, which appear quite old, still receive CPU patches? If not, it is probably time to stop using it. Coreboot may give you a fighting chance however.
- justaj 3y agoIIRC LB supports microcode updates, but I don't think older CPUs will receive new microcode updates from CPU vendors. Then again, newer CPUs have a host of other problems, like only supporting platforms where rolling your own boot firmware / UEFI is next to impossible. Personally I think the CPU has a much lower attack surface than something like UEFI (microcode updates are also pretty tiny), so I would rather have an outdated CPU than an outdated / vulnerable UEFI implementation.
- forward1 3y agoDisagree entirely. With an outdated CPU, you could be owned just by running Javascript on the wrong site. Not so with a vulnerable UEFI/BIOS, that requires additional privesc as is seen here.
- justaj 3y agoHmm, I see your point. Couldn't such CPU bugs be patched / mitigated in software (which would then incur some performance penalties) ?