1 |
R0b0t1 wrote: |
2 |
> On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 12:10 AM, R0b0t1 <r030t1@×××××.com> wrote: |
3 |
>> On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 12:02 AM, Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
4 |
>>> Dale wrote: |
5 |
>>>> Howdy, |
6 |
>>>> |
7 |
>>>> I ran up on this link. Is there any truth to it and should any of us |
8 |
>>>> Gentooers be worried about it? |
9 |
>>>> |
10 |
>>>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/11/07/linux_usb_security_bugs/ |
11 |
>>>> |
12 |
>>>> Isn't Linux supposed to be more secure than this?? |
13 |
>>>> |
14 |
>>>> Dale |
15 |
>>>> |
16 |
>>>> :-) :-) |
17 |
>>>> |
18 |
>>> |
19 |
>>> To reply to all that posted so far. I did see that it requires physical |
20 |
>>> access, like a lot of other things. Once a person has physical access, |
21 |
>>> there are a number of things that can go wrong. |
22 |
>>> |
23 |
>>> It does seem to be one of those things that while possible, has anyone |
24 |
>>> been able to do it in the real world and even without physical access? |
25 |
>>> Odds are, no. |
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 |
>>> |
41 |
> I suppose I should add that once the basic work has been done for an |
42 |
> exploit like this it will have great reproducibility. But at that |
43 |
> level you are (usually) talking about very well funded actors, and one |
44 |
> should also be worried about controller-level exploits that would be |
45 |
> much harder to discover from an operating system. |
46 |
> |
47 |
> If you can't surround your computer with trustworthy armed guards, |
48 |
> assume you suffer from a serious vulnerability based on the |
49 |
> preliminary work the article is talking about. |
50 |
> |
51 |
> Rainbows and Sunshine, |
52 |
> R0b0t1 |
53 |
> |
54 |
> |
55 |
|
56 |
|
57 |
I've considered encrypting my stuff. I'm talking locked down from power |
58 |
up all the way through. Those who have been on this list a while and |
59 |
know me, they know that would be a disaster. If anything could go wrong |
60 |
with it, it would. |
61 |
|
62 |
While I try to be secure, I'm not going nuts over it. I do lock my |
63 |
screen if I leave and sometimes even logout but I don't put hand |
64 |
grenades and other booby traps around it. Heck, if I did, I'd likely |
65 |
trip up and hurt myself. Ooops!! |
66 |
|
67 |
I guess I'll just kept my top secret stuff in my head. ;-) |
68 |
|
69 |
Dale |
70 |
|
71 |
:-) :-) |