Microsoft Responds to Secure Boot Story, Doesn't Address Issue
Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 23rd Sep 2011 22:22 UTC, submitted by kragil
Windows The story about how secure boot for Windows 8, part of UEFI, will hinder the use of non-signed binaries and operating systems, like Linux, has registered at Redmond as well. The company posted about it on the Building Windows 8 blog - but didn't take any of the worries away. In fact, Red Hat's Matthew Garrett, who originally broke this story, has some more information - worst of which is that Red Hat has received confirmation from hardware vendors that some of them will not allow you to disable secure boot.
E-mail Print r 6   · Read More · 187 Comment(s) http://osne.ws/jfl
Permalink for comment 490644
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Stop whining!
by gilboa on Sat 24th Sep 2011 20:23 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Stop whining!"
gilboa
Member since:
2005-07-06

"What *exactly* is the benefit of this technology, other than the obvious one for Microsoft?


The benefit is that when Windows is inevitably compromised by a piece of malware, the malware can't write itself to the boot sector. "

OK, you do realize that once the OS is compromised, nothing stops the malware from deactivating the signature check mechanism and installing a key logger as a signed update or even throw in a modified kernel image while they are at it, right? Once a software gains "root/admin" *user* access to the system, this is end game for *any* security mechanism. (Even SELinux in strict mode can be circumvented given sufficiently determined attacker).
*Even* if Microsoft goes the extra mile (and they are most likely thinking about it) and disable installation of legacy applications and/or any applications that are not downloaded from MS Market - this still will be useless against OS vulnerabilities.

Walled garden, nothing more, nothing less.

- Gilboa

Edited 2011-09-24 20:26 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3