Re: [RFC] Second attempt at kernel secure boot support

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 04:52:44PM +0000, James Bottomley wrote:

> The first question is how many compromises do you need.  Without
> co-operation from windows, you don't get to install something in the
> boot system, so if you're looking for a single compromise vector, the
> only realistic attack is to trick the user into booting a hacked linux
> system from USB or DVD.

You run a binary. It pops up a box saying "Windows needs your permission 
to continue", just like almost every other Windows binary that's any 
use. Done.

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-efi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux