4 ms·

Drivers have had to be signed forever and pass pretty rigorous test suites and static analysis. The problem here is obviously this other file the driver sucks

• rlanday 2y ago
  There’s a design problem here if the driver can’t be self-contained in such a way that it’s possible to roll back the kernel to a known good state.
  • Rinzler89 2y ago
    How so? Preventing roll-backs on software updates is a "security feature" in most cases for better and for worse. Yeah, it would be convenient for tinkerers or in rare events such as these, but would be a security issue in the 99,9..99% of the time for enterprise users where security is the main concern.
    • Demonoculus 2y ago
      I don't really understand this, many Linux distributions like Universal Blue advertise rollbacks as a feature. How is preventing a roll-back a "security feature"?
      • sltkr 2y ago
        Imagine a driver has an exploitable vulnerability that is fixed in an update. If an attacker can force a rollback to the vulnerable older version, then the system is still vulnerable. Disallowing the rollback fixes this.
        • Demonoculus 2y ago
          ohh
• fransje26 2y ago
  > Just because the driver didn't crash for Microsoft in their lab doesn't mean a different file can't crash it... "What are you complaining about? It works on my machine."™