Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Microsoft blacklists Secure Boot-disabling policies in Windows
iTnews (AUS) ^ | Jul 13 2016 9:00AM (AUS) | Juha Saarinen

Posted on 07/12/2016 8:08:46 PM PDT by Utilizer

Microsoft's July round of patches fixes a vulnerability that could be used to bypass the Secure Boot protection feature if an attacker simply adds a policy to the target Windows systems.

Microsoft mandates Secure Boot on newer PCs designed to run Windows. The feature is implemented in the unified extensible firmware interface (UEFI) code that checks the Windows boot loader before it starts up the operating system, to ensure it is digitally signed by Microsoft.

Secure Boot can, however, be bypassed completely by applying a Windows group policy, providing attackers with full access to systems thought to be locked down.

"An attacker who successfully exploited this vulnerability could disable code integrity checks, allowing test-signed executables and drivers to be loaded on a target device," Microsoft said...

(Excerpt) Read more at itnews.com.au ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Computers/Internet
KEYWORDS: bugs; malware; microsoft; security; uefi; windows
Another patch, another security flaw uncovered.

This one rated as "critical". I suppose that's a bit more professional-sounding than "awkward".

1 posted on 07/12/2016 8:08:46 PM PDT by Utilizer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: dayglored

Ping!


2 posted on 07/12/2016 8:10:54 PM PDT by Utilizer (Bacon A'kbar! - In world today are only peaceful people, and the muzrims trying to kill them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Utilizer

Geez... I think this is covered by my post a few minutes back about Patch Tuesday, but if it draws some good comments I’ll ping the list later. Thanks for posting and pinging!

This whole “Secure Boot” thing bothers me. Two-edged sword if ever there was one.


3 posted on 07/12/2016 8:20:07 PM PDT by dayglored ("Listen. Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dayglored

Yeah. I saw your post directly after I reloaded the index page after I started this thread. You must have posted your thread while I was still formatting this one, thus the overlap.

By all means, let us see what comments this one draws by its specificity and combined with yours we might have some good observations come about because of them both.

Cheers!


4 posted on 07/12/2016 8:45:55 PM PDT by Utilizer (Bacon A'kbar! - In world today are only peaceful people, and the muzrims trying to kill them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: dayglored

Oh, and I agree about the whole “UEFI” concept currently being implemented. I can all too easily see a day come about when the u-soft people have engineered it to the point where if you are not running a validated up-to-date version of Windows(tm) (or are running Linux, BSD, OS/2, etc) the machine will not boot or will hang from the beginning.

Not such a difficult concept to consider when you contemplate the maneuvers the ‘doze people have been foisting upon unsuspecting users to force them to “upgrade” to win10 like it or not.


5 posted on 07/12/2016 8:52:45 PM PDT by Utilizer (Bacon A'kbar! - In world today are only peaceful people, and the muzrims trying to kill them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Utilizer

Will this disable booting from a CD/DVD?


6 posted on 07/12/2016 9:16:02 PM PDT by TChad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TChad

Not the same thing. This deals with the boot process itself, not the Selected Boot Medium.

And the software designers for the other aspect of it should have done a bit more research before selecting “Unrestricted Electronic Fuel Injection” as their concept name.


7 posted on 07/12/2016 9:23:08 PM PDT by Utilizer (Bacon A'kbar! - In world today are only peaceful people, and the muzrims trying to kill them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Utilizer
Not such a difficult concept to consider when you contemplate the maneuvers the ‘doze people have been foisting upon unsuspecting users to force them to “upgrade” to win10 like it or not.

I'm really surprised Microsoft hasn't pulled a page from Apple's book yet and just have their system auto-update, no choice from the end-user. It would make all these changes that much easier.
8 posted on 07/13/2016 12:02:23 AM PDT by Svartalfiar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Utilizer

If it isn’t POSIX-compliant, why would you want to boot it into hardware you own?


9 posted on 07/13/2016 12:10:37 AM PDT by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson