this post was submitted on 27 Nov 2024
255 points (95.7% liked)

Technology

60101 readers
2112 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
255
Found in the wild: The world’s first unkillable UEFI bootkit for Linux (arstechnica.com)
submitted 4 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
39 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

“Whether a proof of concept or not, Bootkitty marks an interesting move forward in the UEFI threat landscape, breaking the belief about modern UEFI bootkits being Windows-exclusive threats,” ESET researchers wrote. “Even though the current version from VirusTotal does not, at the moment, represent a real threat to the majority of Linux systems, it emphasizes the necessity of being prepared for potential future threats.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 54 points 4 weeks ago (5 children)

Unfortunately a lot of people in the Linux world still hate secure boot because they associate it with locking your PC to only running windows. Never mind the fact that basically every big Linux distro plays nicely with secure boot these days, and has for a while now.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 4 weeks ago (3 children)

I associate it with the fight I've had every single time I tried to use it. It's never been a smooth process on any server I attempted to use it on. Usually I either run into problems with a system not wanting to properly boot the memory stick even with a full UEFI image flashed to it, or if I do get that to work I go through the whole installation process only to find the system unbootable for whatever reason. Eventually I just give up and do a standard installation because why should I have to work this hard to put an OS on a machine?

[–] charade_you_are 15 points 4 weeks ago

I actually had a system that wouldn't initiate the video card because of secure boot and many other problems with over the years that I repaired them for a living. Left a very bad taste in my mouth but if it's actually improving I'll it again.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

It is a system one has to understand fully, i.e. not like ssh, where you can understand connecting to a remote host without bothering about key pairs, x11 forwading, etc.

I was lucky enough to have figured out Gentoo enough where plugging in secure boot was just extending my own system update script. Admittedly, I don't know how much other distros fight back.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm on Debian, they've been providing UEFI images for a number of years so everything should "just work". In fact I have one server where things did just work and that's the only system using UEFI. Two other servers of the same model and BIOS version completely failed after numerous attempts so I finally said screw it and just did a normal install.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Do you know how that works? Is it something like Ubuntu where Canonical uses some sort of chain from Microsoft or do you have to embed the cert they provide into UEFI yourself?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 weeks ago

Sorry, I really haven't a clue. I just know once in awhile it does work, but usually it fails for me.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Check out sbctl

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Shouldn't this all be handled automatically by the Debian installer though? It seems weird that I would ever have to run other tools just to install a brand new system.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 weeks ago

Oh yeah Debian has their own documentation for SecureBoot. If thats not working though, check out sbctl.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

because they associate it with locking your PC to only running windows.

They're not exactly wrong. BIOS/UEFI bugs that make it a royal pain to use secure boot with anything but Windows are pretty common.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

And many mainboards also suck in this regard. On mine, I can set secure boot mode to either 'Windows OS' (which means secure boot on) or 'Other OS' (which means secure boot is off). Took me a couple hours to figure that out

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 weeks ago

Can confirm. I've seen this on multiple boards. I think this was Asus nomenclature.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 weeks ago

The Fedora doc on this is a bit old but it's still mostly the same:

Secure boot activates a lock-down mode in the Linux kernel which disables various features kernel functionality:

  • Loading kernel modules that are not signed by a trusted key.
  • Using kexec to load an unsigned kernel image.
  • Hibernation and resume from hibernation.
  • User-space access to physical memory and I/O ports.
  • Module parameters that allow setting memory and I/O port addresses.
  • Writing to MSRs through /dev/cpu/*/msr.
  • Use of custom ACPI methods and tables.

The implementation of secure boot is still questionable to this day, but it is understandable that it doesn't always play nice with Linux. I do believe you can use hibernate now as long as you have an encrypted swap (LUKS).

I can definitely see the pain if you happen to be a kernel dev or use linux on any SBC with IO ports you want to mess with in userspace and not make en entire overkill kernel module for.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

Yea, I guess that initial total lack of understanding and big headlines has left a long-lasting scar. Admittedly, secure boot could be used to lock a machine down if the ability to turn it off and/or manage the keys yourself was removed.

We'll get there, eventually :)

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 weeks ago

Never mind the fact that basically every big Linux distro plays nicely with secure boot these days, and has for a while now.

In my experience nicely is still pretty relative. It still seems to be the most common area things go wrong on my installs and place I have the hardest time working around...

and the bigger part, it's a solution to a problem that I've never seen happen in the wild, and really can't fathom happening on linux that doesn't involve a very dumb user running software from an unknown source as root.