• _edge@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    156
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    There are several ways to exploit LogoFAIL. Remote attacks work by first exploiting an unpatched vulnerability in a browser, media player, or other app and using the administrative control gained to replace the legitimate logo image processed early in the boot process with an identical-looking one that exploits a parser flaw. The other way is to gain brief access to a vulnerable device while it’s unlocked and replace the legitimate image file with a malicious one.

    In short, the adversary requires elevated access to replace a file on the EFI partition. In this case, you should consider the machine compromised with or without this flaw.

    You weren’t hoping that Secure Boot saves your ass, were you?

    • deadcade@lemmy.deadca.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      1 year ago

      Since the EFI partition is unencrypted, physical access would do the trick here too, even with every firmware/software security measure.

        • Bitrot@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          22
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          It can outlast those too.

          In many of these cases, however, it’s still possible to run a software tool freely available from the IBV or device vendor website that reflashes the firmware from the OS. To pass security checks, the tool installs the same cryptographically signed UEFI firmware already in use, with only the logo image, which doesn’t require a valid digital signature, changed.

    • InnerScientist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      replace a file on the EFI partition.

      Doesn’t this mean that secure boot would save your ass? If you verify that the boot files are signed (secure boot) then you can’t boot these modified files or am I missing something?

      • _edge@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well, not an expert. We learned now that logos are not signed. I’m not sure the boot menu config file is not either. So on a typical linux setup you can inject a command there.

      • hottari@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        If I can replace a file in your EFI, how hard would it be to sign the same file.

      • fl42v@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        If it can execute in ram (as far as I understand, they’ve been talking about fileless attacks, so… Possible?), it can just inject whatever

        Addit: also, sucure boot on most systems, well, sucks, unless you remove m$ keys and flash yours, at least. The thing is, they signed shim and whatever was the alternative chainable bootloader (mako or smth?) effectively rendering the whole thing useless; also there was a grub binary distributed as part of some kaspersky’s livecd-s with unlocked config, so, yet again, load whatever tf you want

        • InnerScientist@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Last time I enabled secure boot it was with a unified kernel image, there was nothing on the EFI partition that was unsigned.

          Idk about the default shim setup but using dracut with uki, rolled keys and luks it’d be secure.

          After this you’re protected from offline attacks only though, unless you sign the UKI on a different device any program with root could still sign the modified images itself but no one could do an Evil Maid Attack or similar.

          • fl42v@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            The point with m$ keys was that you should delete them as they’re used to sign stuff that loads literally anything given your maid is insistent enough.

            [note: it was mentioned in the arch wiki that sometimes removing m$ keys bricks some (which exactly wasn’t mentioned) devices]

      • _edge@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, that’s my understanding. A normal user cannot do this. (And of course, an attacker shouldn’t not control a local user in the first place.)

        Physical access is also a risk, but physical access trumps everything.

            • Murdoc
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              Ah, so the next Air Bud movie will be what, Hack Bud?
              “There’s nothing in the specifications that says that a dog can’t have admin access.”
              “Nothing but 'net!”

      • fl42v@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Unless they find another way to escalate privileges… A bug, a random binary with suid, etc

    • falsem@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Yeah, if someone has write access to your boot partition then you’re kind of already screwed.