all 44 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 126 points 1 year ago (7 children)

This is heavily sensationalized. UEFI "secure boot" has never been "secure" if you (the end user) trust vendor or Microsoft signatures. Alongside that, this ""backdoor"" (diagnostic/troubleshooting tool) requires physical access, at which point there are plenty of other things you can do with the same result.

Yes, the impact is theoretically high, but it's the same for all the other vulnerable EFI applications MS and vendors sign willy-nilly. In order to get a properly locked-down secure boot, you need to trust only yourself.

When you trust Microsoft's secure boot keys, all it takes is one signed EFI application with an exploit to make your machine vulnerable to this type of attack.

Another important part is persistence, especially for UEFI malware. The only reason it's so easy is because Windows built-in "factory reset" is so terrible. Fresh installing from a USB drive can easily avoid that.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 50 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    puts away pitchfork and lit torch

    Thank you

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    No point in putting the lit torch away when you can use it to roast meanwhile!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Oh, heck... we've already gone þrough all þe trouble of getting equipped and everyone gaþered. Might as well go ahead wiþ it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    I think... we all think the bag was a nice idea. But - not pointin' any fingers - they coulda been done better. So, how 'bout, no bags this time - but next time, we do the bags right, and then we go full regalia.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Can't you forget the predefined keys and add your own?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    Depends entirely on the device. On most desktops, you should be able to. On a lot of laptops, this may leave them in an unbootable state (due to GPU option ROMs).

    Check for your specific hardware before removing factory default secure boot keys.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 30 points 1 year ago

    Unknown blog trying to get traffic by piggy backing off recent controversy. Nothing beats the classics..

  • source
  • [–] 26 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Wait until you hear about the proprietary microcode backdoors in Intel and AMD processors.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    this is one of the reasons why i've only purchased systemd w libre/coreboot

    i'm aware that it doesn't completely mitigate it; but it's the only viable step in the right direction of choices that we're allowed to have.

    i sometimes wish i could go back to buying american, but the likes of system76 have already made their allegiances clear.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    the likes of system76 have already made their allegiances clear.

    Aw crap. What did they do? :(

    Been somewhat out of the loop lately.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    then you're in luck because it's old news. (circa 2016 iirc).

    tldr: they decided to pull away active development on some foss projects because they conflicted with their profit motive.

    it's easy to appreciate why a for-profit company would want to protect its revenue stream and it would seem that the waters would get really murky when their products rely on free and open sourced work; but i know from personal experience that much bigger fish like google and oracle have made it work REALLY well for themselves and in much better fashion (atleast publicly) than system76 has.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Ah I see what you're saying.

    Thanks for taking the time for the clarification! I'm sure this would clear it up for some other folks as well.

    I also know they're a fraction of the size of those giants who can probably field staff specifically for FOSS contribution, but that's still a bit disheartening. I hope things improve.

    Every time they've seemed like a good option I find myself balking at the price though lol.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    my last linux rig died and i had to buy a new one and system76 price tag made me go with ordinary windows laptop and putting linux on it.

    i'm currently getting reminded of how much headache buying a from a linux-first company alleviates too; it's taken me over a week to setup an encrypted installation to dual boot with windows. lol

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 31 points 1 year ago

    At least Framework disclosed this issue and are pushing out fixes.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago

    So physical access is indeed root access? I for one am shocked.

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Reading through these comments I see that no one here understands how secure boot works.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago

    Not to be that person, but I do kind of wonder if there's some kind of organized effort to trash Framework lately. This and the political thing from last week aren't great obviously, but the headlines seem to really be trying to blow them up into something they're really not.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago*

    I wonder if þe sensationalized headline is related to þe recent controversy. A little FUD¹ to hurt sales?

    P.s. "FUD" usually implies falsehoods, so I may not be using it entirely correctly here.

  • source
  • [+] -12 points 1 year ago (20 children)
  • [–] 30 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    If you have secure boot off OR don’t have a bios password you are just as insecure as this “vulnerability” would make you

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    So don’t use it? How much or how little actual security secure boot provides is a topic that has been discussed to oblivion. I brought it up to make a point of how badly people are overreacting about the severity of this latest framework news.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] [S] 11 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    This has been fixed. Check rest of the article.

    mm was placed for an legitimate purpose.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    A legitimate backdoor is still a backdoor. If you have security measures and a way to bypass them, you don't have security measures.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    Its not a backdoor, because secure boot was never about safety to begin with. Its just a piece of security theater, whose primary use is more control for microsoft. "Secure" boot only boots software signed with a microsoft key, thats the "security". Microsoft also allows linux distributions to be signed, but nothing is technically stopping them from just refusing, for " security reasons", and on some systems secure boot cant be turned off. So it being bustable is a good thing. There are other ways to protect devices from physical access, but generally, if attackers have physical access to your computer, then its compromised, secure boot or not. Framework just didnt want to play along.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (8 children)
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    they sponsored Omarchy and Hyprland. one a glorified dotfiles arch "distro" built by DHH who is pretty much a fascist and Hyprland a buggy neon mess of a WM built by a transphobic fascist.

    So yeah, they're not having a good time right now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    ????? It s software? How it s facist or transphobic of whatever. If tomorrow linus start doing bad stuff I won't say don't use Linux????

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    because they're built by individuals who are those things. that's the controversy. that's it.

    the whole thing is people are upset that Framework sponsored those things because they don't like paying Framework for their machines who in turn then give money to people they feel are facists.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    To me they give to a project that have individual that hold controversial opinion rather than to a controversial individual but I can understand the logic.

    But tbh I would rather be pissed that a company would finnanve other while they sell their stuff for a premium price

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • 8 comments in c/linux@programming.dev view that post
    [–] 49 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I really dislike this headline. A vulnerability was found, responsibly disclosed, and the vendor was responsive and is planning/pushing a fix. The headline drowns a successful mitigation in flowery language of controversy. The article also shows how this can happen on other vendor devices, but the headline here looks like just Framework messed up, when they're the only vulnerable vendor with a fix in the pipeline (based on the info in the article). I really hate headline-bait journalism.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    I have still yet to see a good argument for why anyone needs secure boot, I went to a talk about it at a conference this summer and if anything it made me like it less

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    It's mostly for use cases where you can lose physical access to the computer like overnight at the office, at a hotel while travelling, in a shared server room, etc. It's extra assurance that the computer runs the software you expect it to run and nothing else without at least being somewhat noisy about it.

    This can in turn be used to use the TPM to get a disk encryption key, so you can do full disk encryption but still boot to a normal login screen without entering a password. It will only hand out the key with the correct signed boot chain.

    If you have a desktop PC at home that nobody untrusted touches, then yeah there isn't that much value to it for you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I feel like if someone else has had physical access to the computer though secure boot isn't going to really protect you. It could have a hardware keylogger in it now for all you know. I mean that's probably unlikely, but is it really that much more unlikely than someone sneakily replacing kernel modules and things instead of just installing user mode malware that secure boot wouldn't catch?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    It's meant to protect the software, not the hardware. Of course you can still put a hardware keylogger on it.

    You're also only considering the use case of the owner and user being the same person. In a business context, the user and the owner are two different persons. It can be used to ensure the company's MDM and security software aren't tampered with, for example if you try to exfiltrate company data. In that situation, even if you have a keylogger, it doesn't help you much, it still won't allow you root access on the machine, because the user of the machine doesn't have root access either.

    Same with servers: you don't even care if the hardware is keylogged, nobody's ever using the local console anyway. But it'll tell you if a tech at the datacentre opened the case, and they can't backdoor the OS during a planned hardware maintenance.

    Same with kiosk machines: you can deface the hardware all you want, the machine's still not gonna let you order a free sandwich. If you buy one off eBay you can bypass secure boot and wipe it and use it, but it won't let you sneak a USB on it while nobody's watching and attack the network or anything like that.

    But yes, for most consumers it's a bit less useful and often exploited in anti-consumer ways.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    Joke's on them, I have Secure Boot OFF so I can use hibernate! 😂

  • source