coreboot May 2017

coreboot@coreboot.org

70 participants
202 discussions

Re: [coreboot] Remote security exploit in all 2008+ Intel platforms
by ron minnich 01 May '17

01 May '17

On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 1:17 PM Rene Shuster <rene.shuster(a)bcsemail.org> wrote: > Yes Puri.sm has been debunked. > I disagree. I've seen the systems. From what I can see, Puri.sm has made a good faith effort to go as far possible *with modern x86 chipsets* toward getting rid of the blobs. They can't get to 100%, but they're trying to get as close as possible. ron

1 0

Re: [coreboot] Remote security exploit in all 2008+ Intel platforms
by Trammell Hudson 01 May '17

01 May '17

On Mon, May 01, 2017 at 05:13:10PM +0100, Sam Kuper wrote: > Has anyone here got a link describing or including the fix, either > directly from Intel, or from an OEM? Intel just posted one: https://security-center.intel.com/advisory.aspx?intelid=INTEL-SA-00075&lang… -- Trammell

5 5

PCI-e hot plug on KGPE-D16 [SR-5690]
by Taiidan＠gmx.com 01 May '17

01 May '17

I checked the SR-5690 datasheet and I noticed it supports PCI-e hotplug, I was wondering if anyone has done this and if so how I can do it? I want to be able to hard reset cards don't play nice with VFIO and end up non-responsive and requiring a system reboot to be assigned again (nvidia of course)

1 0

Re: [coreboot] Remote security exploit in all 2008+ Intel platforms
by Timothy Pearson 01 May '17

01 May '17

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 05/01/2017 03:15 PM, Rene Shuster wrote: > Yes Puri.sm has been debunked. Can someone confirm that if you want > recent hardware without Intel ME then Chromebooks with MrChromebox.tech > SeaBIOS ( https://mrchromebox.tech/#devices ) is the way to go? > No, that is not the way to go. Those machines still require the ME (or a "cleaned" ME) to operate. The "cleaned" ME is still suspect in my book due to the fact that we have no idea what mode the ME hardware is operating in, combined with the fact that Intel would have no responsibility for any data breaches arising from a "cleaned" ME since the hardware is operating in a mode it was never intended to operate in outside of potentially Intel's facilities. If you want to avoid the ME, you will need to switch to ARM or POWER or use older x86 hardware from the 2012 era. The ARM Chromebooks aren't bad, but I personally find the keyboard and trackpad on the ASUS models lacking. - -- Timothy Pearson Raptor Engineering +1 (415) 727-8645 (direct line) +1 (512) 690-0200 (switchboard) https://www.raptorengineering.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJZB5muAAoJEK+E3vEXDOFbGn8H/Az6let+sT1qB84iU+XZ+Zmu eGCUCeeG25E99QYf0h4mTkzmlsWijWNKxsqeoD3zDeku67ANBEmG2QO0Lsde21k+ vFqggIR2nh0+552j1xVRZPAkQlJyGkTSeCkyTTq8qb1VmSXJJuhpfTmIAzX9rdSG xPVI/8elBDPE05P33fOlBEyOs1K3ADKyJRO7MpWvw+I1ppcVqlPz1CwEgDuqAfcq gQzyzSvLla2o2anGSPS3ht5xXSgnocCsgOSMeKPMUtC9rciH7zVimMng9qbwbMxZ yenI0Lt11NsTsAAsZd4nDczc8SSOtSt99a0GpWp5w0V7KYp/bdLNH1tILap4cm0= =uP7X -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: [coreboot] Remote security exploit in all 2008+ Intel platforms
by Rene Shuster 01 May '17

01 May '17

Yes Puri.sm has been debunked. Can someone confirm that if you want recent hardware without Intel ME then Chromebooks with MrChromebox.tech SeaBIOS ( https://mrchromebox.tech/#devices ) is the way to go? On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 3:34 PM, BogDan Vatra <bogdan(a)kde.org> wrote: > Ah, I thought it's something inside the CPUs :) It sound so familiar ... > > On May 1, 2017 21:38, "mdn" <bernardlprf(a)openmailbox.org> wrote: > >> >> >> Le 01/05/2017 19:59, BogDan Vatra a écrit : >> > Hi Ron, >> > >> > If anyone can *prove* that it is/was possible to remotely access *any* >> > Intel (from 2008+) based computer, it's the beginning of the end of >> > Intel. >> > >> > BogDan. >> > >> > P.S. I know what Intel ME and AMD PSP are*, but I have no idea what >> > WEP is. So, sorry for my stupid question, but what is WEP? >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wired_Equivalent_Privacy >> > * Well, I only know that they are some buzzwords to sell/describe >> > nicely some sort of *unproven* backdoors inserted in every consumer >> > computer, even we, the users, didn't ask for such things. What makes >> > me suspicious is the lack of any documentation (at least AMD's PSP)... >> > >> > 2017-05-01 20:36 GMT+03:00 ron minnich <rminnich(a)gmail.com>: >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 10:30 AM BogDan Vatra <bogdan(a)kde.org> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Maybe this is a new fools' day joke? May fools' day joke? >> >>> This looks way too bad to be true ... >> >>> >> >> >> >> Not too bad to be true, not surprising to many of us who have been >> warning >> >> of this since, say, 2004. It's just that nobody seemed to care (I'm >> speaking >> >> as someone who gave his share of talks to different parts of USG -- >> people >> >> always acted worrried, nothing changed. I don't expect anything to >> change >> >> this time either). >> >> >> >> This will probably be another object listen like WEP, only much, much >> worse. >> >> >> >> ron >> > >> >> -- >> Note: veuillez s'il vous plaît utiliser GnuPg pour nos futures >> conversations >> https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/fr/ >> Plus d'info ici: >> http://www.bibmath.net/crypto/index.php?action=affiche&quoi=moderne/pgp >> >> Message envoyé avec GNU Icedove un fork de Thunderbird >> https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Icedove >> >> >> -- >> coreboot mailing list: coreboot(a)coreboot.org >> https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot >> > > -- > coreboot mailing list: coreboot(a)coreboot.org > https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot > -- Tech III * AppControl * Endpoint Protection * Server Maintenance Buncombe County Schools Technology Department Network Group ComicSans Awareness Campaign <http://comicsanscriminal.com>

1 0

Re: [coreboot] Remote security exploit in all 2008+ Intel platforms
by mdn 01 May '17

01 May '17

Le 01/05/2017 19:59, BogDan Vatra a écrit : > Hi Ron, > > If anyone can *prove* that it is/was possible to remotely access *any* > Intel (from 2008+) based computer, it's the beginning of the end of > Intel. > > BogDan. > > P.S. I know what Intel ME and AMD PSP are*, but I have no idea what > WEP is. So, sorry for my stupid question, but what is WEP? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wired_Equivalent_Privacy > * Well, I only know that they are some buzzwords to sell/describe > nicely some sort of *unproven* backdoors inserted in every consumer > computer, even we, the users, didn't ask for such things. What makes > me suspicious is the lack of any documentation (at least AMD's PSP)... > > 2017-05-01 20:36 GMT+03:00 ron minnich <rminnich(a)gmail.com>: >> >> >> On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 10:30 AM BogDan Vatra <bogdan(a)kde.org> wrote: >>> >>> Maybe this is a new fools' day joke? May fools' day joke? >>> This looks way too bad to be true ... >>> >> >> Not too bad to be true, not surprising to many of us who have been warning >> of this since, say, 2004. It's just that nobody seemed to care (I'm speaking >> as someone who gave his share of talks to different parts of USG -- people >> always acted worrried, nothing changed. I don't expect anything to change >> this time either). >> >> This will probably be another object listen like WEP, only much, much worse. >> >> ron > -- Note: veuillez s'il vous plaît utiliser GnuPg pour nos futures conversations https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/fr/ Plus d'info ici: http://www.bibmath.net/crypto/index.php?action=affiche&quoi=moderne/pgp Message envoyé avec GNU Icedove un fork de Thunderbird https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Icedove

2 1

Re: [coreboot] Remote security exploit in all 2008+ Intel platforms
by BogDan Vatra 01 May '17

01 May '17

Hi Ron, If anyone can *prove* that it is/was possible to remotely access *any* Intel (from 2008+) based computer, it's the beginning of the end of Intel. BogDan. P.S. I know what Intel ME and AMD PSP are*, but I have no idea what WEP is. So, sorry for my stupid question, but what is WEP? * Well, I only know that they are some buzzwords to sell/describe nicely some sort of *unproven* backdoors inserted in every consumer computer, even we, the users, didn't ask for such things. What makes me suspicious is the lack of any documentation (at least AMD's PSP)... 2017-05-01 20:36 GMT+03:00 ron minnich <rminnich(a)gmail.com>: > > > On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 10:30 AM BogDan Vatra <bogdan(a)kde.org> wrote: >> >> Maybe this is a new fools' day joke? May fools' day joke? >> This looks way too bad to be true ... >> > > Not too bad to be true, not surprising to many of us who have been warning > of this since, say, 2004. It's just that nobody seemed to care (I'm speaking > as someone who gave his share of talks to different parts of USG -- people > always acted worrried, nothing changed. I don't expect anything to change > this time either). > > This will probably be another object listen like WEP, only much, much worse. > > ron

1 0

Re: [coreboot] Remote security exploit in all 2008+ Intel platforms
by ron minnich 01 May '17

01 May '17

On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 10:30 AM BogDan Vatra <bogdan(a)kde.org> wrote: > Maybe this is a new fools' day joke? May fools' day joke? > This looks way too bad to be true ... > > Not too bad to be true, not surprising to many of us who have been warning of this since, say, 2004. It's just that nobody seemed to care (I'm speaking as someone who gave his share of talks to different parts of USG -- people always acted worrried, nothing changed. I don't expect anything to change this time either). This will probably be another object listen like WEP, only much, much worse. ron

1 0

Re: [coreboot] Remote security exploit in all 2008+ Intel platforms
by persmule 01 May '17

01 May '17

We could just remove or cleanse <https://github.com/corna/me_cleaner> the ME to seal this loophole. 在 2017年05月02日 00:13, Sam Kuper 写道: > On 01/05/2017, Shawn <citypw(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> https://semiaccurate.com/2017/05/01/remote-security-exploit-2008-intel-plat… > The piece states, "on April 25, Intel released a firmware fix for this > unnamed issue. It affects every Intel machine from Nehalem in 2008 to > Kaby Lake in 2017." > > Has anyone here got a link describing or including the fix, either > directly from Intel, or from an OEM? At the moment, there are no > advisories listed at https://security-center.intel.com/advisories.aspx > newer than April 3, so presumably either the piece is false, or else > the firmware fix was released to OEMs but not publicly. > > Discussion elsewhere: > > https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14237266 > > https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/68ma1a/every_intel_platform_with_am… >

4 3

Re: [coreboot] Remote security exploit in all 2008+ Intel platforms
by BogDan Vatra 01 May '17

01 May '17

Maybe this is a new fools' day joke? May fools' day joke? This looks way too bad to be true ... BogDan. P.S. I didn't found any Intel patches from April 25th... 2017-05-01 18:38 GMT+03:00 Shawn <citypw(a)gmail.com>: > https://semiaccurate.com/2017/05/01/remote-security-exploit-2008-intel-plat… > > -- > coreboot mailing list: coreboot(a)coreboot.org > https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

1 0

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

coreboot May 2017