| 1 |
On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 12:02 AM, Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Dale wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Howdy, |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> I ran up on this link. Is there any truth to it and should any of us |
| 6 |
>> Gentooers be worried about it? |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/11/07/linux_usb_security_bugs/ |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> Isn't Linux supposed to be more secure than this?? |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> Dale |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
>> :-) :-) |
| 15 |
>> |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> To reply to all that posted so far. I did see that it requires physical |
| 19 |
> access, like a lot of other things. Once a person has physical access, |
| 20 |
> there are a number of things that can go wrong. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> It does seem to be one of those things that while possible, has anyone |
| 23 |
> been able to do it in the real world and even without physical access? |
| 24 |
> Odds are, no. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
The most widely publicized example is STUXNET. There are also reports |
| 28 |
that malicious USB keys with driver-level exploits are sometimes used |
| 29 |
for industrial espionage. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
The key point being that in either case, someone is spending a lot of |
| 32 |
money to research and set up a plausible attack. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
> Still, all things considered, Linux is pretty secure. BSD is more |
| 35 |
> secure from what I've read but Linux is better than windoze. |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
> Dale |
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
> :-) :-) |
| 40 |
> |
Archives