Luckily it is BootHole, not ButtHole
For once it is not Intel:
Deals and Reviews: LowEndBoxes Review | Avoid dodgy providers with The LEBRE Whitelist | Free hosting (with conditions): Evolution-Host, NanoKVM, FreeMach, ServedEZ | Get expert copyediting and copywriting help at The Write Flow
Comments
Ironic that it's due to f'kin MS and the introduction of so-called secure UEFI?
So it was some butthole trying to make it awkward for lusers to boot something other than Windoze.
It wisnae me! A big boy done it and ran away.
NVMe2G for life! until death (the end is nigh)
Am I missing something, or is this vulnerability actually not a vulnerability? Who cares about that Secure Boot bullshit anyway?
I'll say, I've never seen a Linux server with secure boot so this one is unamusing .
Universal Layer LLC, a privacy conscious hosting provider
Check us out @ ulayer.net / twitter.com/ulayer_net
It's only enabled on consumer devices by default?
Imagine actually turning on Secure Boot when running anything other than Windows on your system. LOL.
Cheap dedis are my drug, and I'm too far gone to turn back.
On Linux consumer devices? Never seen any consumer device pre-installed with a Linux distro to be honest. I know Android has it by default with newer devices though.
Universal Layer LLC, a privacy conscious hosting provider
Check us out @ ulayer.net / twitter.com/ulayer_net
My newest server is quite old by now (HP something gen8) still has BIOS ... So I only encountered Secure Boot in laptops and workstations. They probably came with Windows all of them. (I usually shrink that partition and install Linux.)
... So I was just indicating that I didn't know that servers didn't have Secure Boot by default.