Aaron Mason wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 3:39 AM Nick Holland
> wrote:
> >
> > On 2020-05-14 11:08, i...@aulix.com wrote:
> >
> > I actually had Adaptec give me a firmware update with a time bomb in
> > it, and didn't bother to tell me that after X days, it would brick my
> > adapter and
Dear Gurus,
Please let me know, are there any advantages of UltraSparc IIe over Cortex A7
AllWinner H3 for a secure communication host ignoring a factor of power
efficiency, size and loud noise?
IMHO the only feature OpenBSD can benefit from UltraSparc is StackGhost ?
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 3:39 AM Nick Holland
wrote:
>
> On 2020-05-14 11:08, i...@aulix.com wrote:
>
> I actually had Adaptec give me a firmware update with a time bomb in
> it, and didn't bother to tell me that after X days, it would brick my
> adapter and prevent me from updating/downdating it.
On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 04:25:11AM +, Mogens Jensen wrote:
> I was just trying out the fw_update program on OpenBSD 6.5, deleting/
> installing all the firmware and was wondering if fw_update will verify
> the files before installing?
Others pointed out that firmwares are signed.
For a while
Nick Holland wrote:
> On 2020-05-14 11:08, i...@aulix.com wrote:
> >> If that binary code was on a ROM, would it be less malicious?
> >
> > Cannot more recent and up to date binary code be more malicious than
> > old one in the ROM?
>
> This has nothing to do with OpenBSD. That can be true
On 2020-05-14 11:08, i...@aulix.com wrote:
>> If that binary code was on a ROM, would it be less malicious?
>
> Cannot more recent and up to date binary code be more malicious than
> old one in the ROM?
This has nothing to do with OpenBSD. That can be true for any kind of
code update, whether
i...@aulix.com wrote:
> > If that binary code was on a ROM, would it be less malicious?
>
> Cannot more recent and up to date binary code be more malicious than old one
> in the ROM?
Our firmwares do not replace code on ROM, since the hardware in question
HAS NO ROM.
> If that binary code was on a ROM, would it be less malicious?
Cannot more recent and up to date binary code be more malicious than old one in
the ROM?
Just because backdoor development is progressing as time goes and old backdoors
may be less dangerous compared to modern ones?
> If the
Janne Johansson wrote:
> Den tors 14 maj 2020 kl 06:27 skrev Mogens Jensen <
> mogens-jen...@protonmail.com>:
>
> > Normally I would just assume that fetched files are verified, but maybe
> > in the case with fw_update, the rationale is that firmware files are
> > binary blobs so we can't know
> Inside every modern Intel CPU is a secondary CPU running an embedded
OS with direct access to nice things like all the RAM, AES
acceleration hardware, TMP etc.
So we have since Core2Duo at least following :
IntelME - can be vanished by Libreboot
Important BLOBS (even in Coreboot) for hardware
On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 1:54 PM wrote:
>
> Please suggest what has been cleaned by moderators on the website:
>
> https://web.archive.org/web/20200514115002/https://www.reddit.com/r/openbsd/comments/gf7wip/how_secure_are_intel_cpus/fpshspb/
No.
But this link may be informative:
Please suggest what has been cleaned by moderators on the website:
https://web.archive.org/web/20200514115002/https://www.reddit.com/r/openbsd/comments/gf7wip/how_secure_are_intel_cpus/fpshspb/
Hi Iain,
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Wednesday, May 13, 2020 7:55 PM, Iain R. Learmonth wrote:
> More details are at:https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs=156229058006706=2
I actually already read that one after seeing the announcement on undeadly.org
iirc ;)
> Assuming you mean trunk,
On 2020-05-13, Vertigo Altair wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> Sorry for late reply but I had a problem accessing this device.
>
> I’ve tried both OpenBSD 6.6 and 6.7 (amd64), nothing changed:
>
> I think you’re probably right; transceiver command is only available for
> ix(4) driver.
AFAIK the list is: ix,
On 2020-05-14, Mogens Jensen wrote:
> I was just trying out the fw_update program on OpenBSD 6.5, deleting/
> installing all the firmware and was wondering if fw_update will verify
> the files before installing?
>
> There is a SHA256.sig in the remote firmware directory, but no
> indication from
I was just trying out the fw_update program on OpenBSD 6.5, deleting/
installing all the firmware and was wondering if fw_update will verify
the files before installing?
There is a SHA256.sig in the remote firmware directory, but no
indication from fw_update, even with verbose output, if this is
Den tors 14 maj 2020 kl 06:27 skrev Mogens Jensen <
mogens-jen...@protonmail.com>:
> Normally I would just assume that fetched files are verified, but maybe
> in the case with fw_update, the rationale is that firmware files are
> binary blobs so we can't know if they are malicious anyway,
17 matches
Mail list logo
