lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon Aug 1 19:14:02 2005 From: jasonc at science.org (Jason Coombs) Subject: Cisco IOS Shellcode Presentation Bart.Lansing@...ls.com wrote: > It occurs to me that your solution is flawed as well. What assurance do > we have that your "protected storage" is future-proof (i.e. unbreachable > by an means whatsoever)? It doesn't have to be unbreachable by any means whatsoever, it has to be unbreachable from a remote location. This is easy to accomplish by not connecting the protected storage to a network interface. The box can still be owned by an attacker who gains physical access to the device, but so what? The protected storage will never be owned by a JPEG and the CPU will never ignore its built-in machine code authentication logic because it would not be implemented in software or firmware. Regards, Jason Coombs jasonc@...ence.org
Powered by blists - more mailing lists