PCs without the new certificates could eventually have trouble booting new OSes.

  • Hirom@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    17 hours ago

    You’re talking of an attacker with physical access. This can indeed defeats secure boot, but physical access defeat most computer security. In an evil maid scenario even LUKS can be defeated. An attacker with physical access can clone the drive, install a keylogger (hardware or software) and capture the passphrase the next time the machine boots.

    Secure Boot can be useful to prevent malware from inserting themselves into the boot process, preventing them from elevating privilege or gaining persistence https://www.xda-developers.com/secure-boot/

    Secure Boot isn’t perfect but it’s widely available and is an useful extra layer of protection, on top of disk encryption (eg LUKS).

    • H Ramus@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      15 hours ago

      I can’t take any Microsoft attempt at security seriously. One of the most important elements to improve security is to delete windows. Secure boot is lots of things but not secure.

      • FreedomAdvocate
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        These are all basically “if your machine is already compromised, they can also get around these other security measures” type exploits though, which are irrelevant.