3 ms·
My mental model is that requiring updates to be signed delivers a lot of security bang for your buck. Do you disagree? An attacker can still steal the private
by 0xDEAFBEAD 2y ago
My mental model is that requiring updates to be signed delivers a lot of security bang for your buck. Do you disagree?
An attacker can still steal the private key, or identify a flaw in the signature checking code. It looks like there are a variety of other, more constrained attacks: https://theupdateframework.io/docs/security/#attacks-and-weaknesses https://theupdateframework.io/docs/security/#attacks-and-wea... But overall, it seems to me that you can make an attacker's life considerably more difficult, for a comparatively small effort.
- saghm 2y agoI don't disagree with everything you said, but I don't see how "therefore, you don't need to worry about a critical update without a signature" follows. The reason that it provides a lot of value is specifically because it helps you notice things like what's going on now so you can avoid installing unsigned updates.