183
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2023
183 points (96.9% liked)
Technology
55647 readers
4249 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Can anyone explain to me if this is an actual risk outside a highly controlled environment? AFAIK, it's a pretty non-casual thing to change the UEFI boot logo, so wouldn't that make this pretty hard to actually pull off?
The article quoted the researchers who indicated it can be done with remote access by using other attack vectors. This is because most UEFI systems store the logo on disk in the EFI system partition. It doesn't need to do anything crazy like compile and flash a modified firmware. All it needs to do is overwrite the logo file on disk.
If you have access to directly write to arbitrary disk locations you already have full control. Why bother with overwriting the logo file with a malicious payload if you can just overwrite the actual kernel...
Due to Secure Boot (if it actually enabled since there are some bogous implementations) this can be prevented. If I understand it correctly, LogoFAIL bypasses this security measure and enables loading unsigned code.