linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: alternative identifier for Phoenix BIOS

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 16 Nov 2008 17:51:42 +0100
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Philipp Kohlbecher <xt28@....de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: alternative identifier for Phoenix BIOS

On Sat 2008-11-15 17:55:20, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Philipp Kohlbecher wrote:
> > My laptop (a Samsung X20) contains a Phoenix BIOS and would benefit from
> > patch 1e22436eba84edfec9c25e5a25d09062c4f91ca9 (x86: reserve low 64K on
> > AMI and Phoenix BIOS boxen).
> > 
> > However, according to /sys/class/dmi/id/bios_vendor, the BIOS identifies
> > its vendor as "Phoenix Technologies LTD" (sans the comma).
> 
> Given that AMI and Phoenix combined is something like 80% of the BIOS
> market, if not more, it might simply be easier to make it unconditional,
>  or make it a whitelist instead.

Whitelist is bad:

even if bios vendor is a good boy and tests their bios with linux,
they will not notice that they corrupt low 64K (not whitelisted), and
will not fix their bios.

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/