Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 2 Nov 2012 16:54:56 +0000 | From | Matthew Garrett <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] Second attempt at kernel secure boot support |
| |
On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 04:52:44PM +0000, James Bottomley wrote:
> The first question is how many compromises do you need. Without > co-operation from windows, you don't get to install something in the > boot system, so if you're looking for a single compromise vector, the > only realistic attack is to trick the user into booting a hacked linux > system from USB or DVD.
You run a binary. It pops up a box saying "Windows needs your permission to continue", just like almost every other Windows binary that's any use. Done.
-- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org
| |