[qubes-users] Re: heads up, qubes 3.2 still vuln to cve-2016-4484 (minor severity)

2017-08-01 Thread cooloutac
On Wednesday, July 19, 2017 at 6:26:16 PM UTC-4, yreb-qusw wrote: > On 07/19/2017 12:17 PM, cooloutac wrote: > > > > > > secure boot isn't supported on qubes unfortunately. Hacking teams insyde > > bios exploit could be used remotely according to experts, so secure boot > > would actually defend

[qubes-users] Re: heads up, qubes 3.2 still vuln to cve-2016-4484 (minor severity)

2017-07-19 Thread yreb-qusw
On 07/19/2017 12:17 PM, cooloutac wrote: secure boot isn't supported on qubes unfortunately. Hacking teams insyde bios exploit could be used remotely according to experts, so secure boot would actually defend against something like that remotely as well. I hope people get over the anti

[qubes-users] Re: heads up, qubes 3.2 still vuln to cve-2016-4484 (minor severity)

2017-07-19 Thread cooloutac
secure boot isn't supported on qubes unfortunately. Hacking teams insyde bios exploit could be used remotely according to experts, so secure boot would actually defend against something like that remotely as well. I hope people get over the anti microsoft and redhat notions about it.

[qubes-users] Re: heads up, qubes 3.2 still vuln to cve-2016-4484 (minor severity)

2017-07-19 Thread yreb-qusw
On 07/18/2017 08:07 PM, pixel fairy wrote: On Tuesday, July 18, 2017 at 10:52:05 PM UTC-7, yreb-qusw wrote: So, If I haven't already, I should have secure boot enabled? ; I saw after I posted that, all the steps, I'd probably end up breaking the machine or locking myself out of it .

[qubes-users] Re: heads up, qubes 3.2 still vuln to cve-2016-4484 (minor severity)

2017-07-19 Thread pixel fairy
On Tuesday, July 18, 2017 at 10:52:05 PM UTC-7, yreb-qusw wrote: > So, If I haven't already, I should have secure boot enabled? ; I saw > after I posted that, all the steps, I'd probably end up breaking the > machine or locking myself out of it . you should definitely put a password on

[qubes-users] Re: heads up, qubes 3.2 still vuln to cve-2016-4484 (minor severity)

2017-07-18 Thread yreb-qusw
On 07/17/2017 08:15 PM, cooloutac wrote: On Monday, July 17, 2017 at 8:31:42 PM UTC-4, pixel fairy wrote: On Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 9:55:55 AM UTC-7, yreb-qusw wrote: On 07/16/2017 01:27 AM, pixel fairy wrote: --- In Dom0 install anti-evil-maid: sudo qubes-dom0-update anti-evil-maid ---

[qubes-users] Re: heads up, qubes 3.2 still vuln to cve-2016-4484 (minor severity)

2017-07-18 Thread cooloutac
On Monday, July 17, 2017 at 8:31:42 PM UTC-4, pixel fairy wrote: > On Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 9:55:55 AM UTC-7, yreb-qusw wrote: > > On 07/16/2017 01:27 AM, pixel fairy wrote: > > > --- > > > In Dom0 install anti-evil-maid: > > > > > > sudo qubes-dom0-update anti-evil-maid > > > --- > > Doesn't

[qubes-users] Re: heads up, qubes 3.2 still vuln to cve-2016-4484 (minor severity)

2017-07-17 Thread pixel fairy
On Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 9:55:55 AM UTC-7, yreb-qusw wrote: > On 07/16/2017 01:27 AM, pixel fairy wrote: > > --- > > In Dom0 install anti-evil-maid: > > > > sudo qubes-dom0-update anti-evil-maid > > --- > Doesn't sound like 'more work' just doing the above, perhaps there is > more to it, I

[qubes-users] Re: heads up, qubes 3.2 still vuln to cve-2016-4484 (minor severity)

2017-07-16 Thread yreb-qusw
On 07/16/2017 01:27 AM, pixel fairy wrote: --- In Dom0 install anti-evil-maid: sudo qubes-dom0-update anti-evil-maid --- Doesn't sound like 'more work' just doing the above, perhaps there is more to it, I thought, it mentioned it's better to install via a USB Drive? What would be the "trade

[qubes-users] Re: heads up, qubes 3.2 still vuln to cve-2016-4484 (minor severity)

2017-07-16 Thread pixel fairy
On Saturday, July 15, 2017 at 10:11:47 PM UTC-7, yreb-qusw wrote: > On 07/14/2017 05:40 PM, pixel fairy wrote: > > any network available OOB > > sorry what would be an example of this ? "out of band" ? yes. ipmi, idrac etc. these usually have a vnc interface to the "console" you'd normally

[qubes-users] Re: heads up, qubes 3.2 still vuln to cve-2016-4484 (minor severity)

2017-07-15 Thread yreb-qusw
On 07/14/2017 05:40 PM, pixel fairy wrote: any network available OOB sorry what would be an example of this ? "out of band" ? I'm not clear what SED is , :) I don't really see any docs on ?initializing AEM , I do see that it says to : --- In Dom0 install anti-evil-maid: sudo

[qubes-users] Re: heads up, qubes 3.2 still vuln to cve-2016-4484 (minor severity)

2017-07-14 Thread pixel fairy
On Thursday, July 13, 2017 at 10:36:25 PM UTC-7, qubester wrote: > So, to exploit this, someone would need physical access to the computer > at risk? physical or any network available OOB. heres an example of what can go wrong https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2017-5689 on a

[qubes-users] Re: heads up, qubes 3.2 still vuln to cve-2016-4484 (minor severity)

2017-07-13 Thread qubester
On 07/12/2017 07:04 PM, pixel fairy wrote: On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 7:32:07 PM UTC-7, pixel fairy wrote: reported here, https://github.com/QubesOS/qubes-issues/issues/2907 wanted to give users without AEM or sed a heads up to fix their grub file or add a boot password if this concerns

[qubes-users] Re: heads up, qubes 3.2 still vuln to cve-2016-4484 (minor severity)

2017-07-12 Thread pixel fairy
On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 7:32:07 PM UTC-7, pixel fairy wrote: > reported here, https://github.com/QubesOS/qubes-issues/issues/2907 > > wanted to give users without AEM or sed a heads up to fix their grub file or > add a boot password if this concerns them. to fix it with grub, (adapted