- cross-posted to:
- news
- technology@beehaw.org
- cross-posted to:
- news
- technology@beehaw.org
You must log in or register to comment.
That title is misleading. Maybe people didn’t notice that way Secure Boot was broken. But people certainly knows many other ways secure boot is broken.
If it says Microslop on it, it’s broken.
BY DESIGN
Gotta offer businesses and security firms job security somehow, and then, they’ll recommend Microslop.
tldr: Either use your own keys or don’t trust secure boot.
I am not a hacker, but what I gathered from the article is that this is due to shims with vulnerabilities being left as trusted instead of being revoked. If that’s the case, wouldn’t the hacker be using a modified version of a compromised shim? It shouldn’t have to be a shim that you actually use right? Or does the signed shim have to correspond to thr correct OS that signed it?
There exists shims that are signed by Microsoft and were not revoked. Normally this would be fine but these shims had weaknesses that allowes hackers to load any code using them. Normally the shims should only run other signed/trusted code. These vulnerable shims can be used to bypass secure boot by replacing your existing bootloader with the shim and then running rootkits/hackerOS/whatever and bypass bitlocker using TPM or just running a level 0 virus that can’t be detected by the OS on any PC which trusts Microsoft’s keys (99% of all PCs)
To prevent this you’d have to not trust the vulnerable shims by either adding them manually to the exclusions list or using your own secure boot keys which would only trust the few bootloader files your pc uses and no other files.
Worst case: it behaves as if secure boot wasn’t on. Without secure boot you wouldn’t need this exploit cause then you can replace the bootloader with whatever you want anyways. With or without secure boot you need administrative permission to replace the bootloader so this is only an issue after your PC is already compromised or if someone had physical access to your PC.
For anyone that hate microslop more than themself and enjoy pain i will provide this to aide in making your own pki, with blackjack and hookers:
https://www.rodsbooks.com/efi-bootloaders/controlling-sb.html#creatingkeys
Microsoft has yet to explain how or why the lapse occurred.
Highly skilled technical staff are expensive, and it turns out that some people still use Windows when Microsoft doesn’t hire the talent necessary to keep Windows working.
Edit: Also, bribes from three letter government agencies are probably pretty nice.
The number of times I’ve seen a fix not get pushed because somebody got laid off is a lot higher than you might think.
Holy hell yes. It’s actually alarming how many security holes are out there simply because management had no clue what people did and canned the last guy responsible for maintaining something. Zombie functions that are holding up the whole stack, but no one has had a clue what they did in 15 years, and we all just look away and hope they keep holding until they’re someone else’s problem.
I cannot make certain teams at my work give a shit about known security vulnerabilities in libraries they use, since they don’t trip our internal scanners. People have their own priorities. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
It used to be Microsoft would hire the best and brightest people straight out of university. Most of those people went in thinking they were going to fix the problems. Usually management would grind them down and they’d give up and go work elsewhere. But they did have some talented people and occasionally those people would be able to make improvements.
Microsoft always sucked, but occasionally they could put out something good. There was a lot of inertia and a lot of half steps backwards for every step forward kind of thing going on. Mostly treading water, occasionally improving.
But now they’ve gotten rid of a lot of people so they can throw more money into the AI money pit. Microsoft is in a constant decline now. The people that worked there that would fight the good fight to improve things (and every now and then win a fight) probably aren’t there any more.
I thought the point of secure boot was to make it harder to install linux
Yes.
You simply sign a corporate contract and pay a corporate fee, and MICROS~1 will sign any shitty broken and backdoored bootloader that you send to them with zero quality control, and it was like that with Windows drivers for years.
“Complexity is the enemy” is a great quote. Definitely keeping that in my pocket for a future design doc review.
The Eternal Enemy: Complexity
apex predator of grug is complexity
complexity bad
say again:
complexity very bad
you say now:
complexity very, very bad
The only thing I like about Microsoft is that their shit products give me job security.
I get to do an extensive Microsoft Teams training for some middle-aged dudes next week. One of the men doesn’t recognize me as someone who can fix his shit. He straight up says, “Have one of your techs, your guys, give me a call” and I always tell him I am a technician and can handle his problem so he doesn’t have to wait. I use my kindest, sweetest customer service voice to talk to him and he has never once called me by my name despite it showing on his computer when I connect to it. He calls me honey and dear a lot and not in the endearing old person way.
But dealing with him pays the bills so
Make him pay extra for that.
I don’t make the prices. I’m just a grunt in the IT trenches. 🥲
Which is why you launch kayaks.
They do go far with trebuchets
Wasn’t there this scandal with Gigabyte motherboards, where Secure Boot showed as enabled, but the motherboards still just booted any unsigned bootcode?!
Same bug on my MSI board too
No wonder no three letter agency has ever complained about it
Or, like me, they never trusted it to begin with.
no one noticed
Did that get Berenstained? I distinctly remember it being broken a decade a ago…
this paticular fix was never found. this last patch tuesday fixed over 500 vulnerabilities. they ran the kernel through mythos. you will be seeing a loy of companies with big patches comong up.
Its been broken multiple times, which is why its important to update your BIOS firmware if your motherboard manufacturer says they have patched security issues.
Yes it’s important to always update to make sure you also have the newest security holes in addition to the old ones that nobody’s noticed. /s
No problem, I turned it off the day I bought this motherboard. It just gets in the way of me running linux
For linux by now it is just incredibly easy to automatically self-sign new boot shims. But why would I add that complexity for no gain at all?
The gaffe is the result of the failure by Microsoft, which oversees the signing of shims, to revoke the publicly available images once vulnerabilities were found in them.
OFC. It’s probably on purpose.
If you’re using Microsoft products, then you care about security theater, legal liability, etc… but not security.
