PrivSec-dev/privsec.dev
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/PrivSec-dev/privsec.dev synced 2024-12-22 12:51:34 -05:00
Code

Update content/posts/hardware/Misinformation on x86 Hardware/index.md

Browse Source 
Co-authored-by: friendly-rabbit-35 <169707731+friendly-rabbit-35@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Tommy <contact@tommytran.io>
This commit is contained in:
Tommy 2024-06-11 20:55:16 -07:00 committed by GitHub
parent bee6f704c7
commit 44c6226a38
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG Key ID: B5690EEEBB952194
1 changed files with 1 additions and 1 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

2
content/posts/hardware/Misinformation on x86 Hardware/index.md
View File

@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ AMD PSP provides its own set of security features:
By buying hardware with Intel CSME disabled, you are **increasing the attack surface** by not having Boot Guard to protect your firmware. Additionally, if you buy hardware so old that you can run `me_cleaner` to disable the ME yourself, it means that these hardware do not have Boot Guard to begin with. In both cases, you will end up with a piece of hardware with no root of trust, and any attempt to implement firmware security will be futile.
I am not aware of any way to disable AMD PSP, but even if this was possible, all that it does is to deprive you of useful security features.
I am not aware of any way to disable AMD PSP, but even if this was possible, all that it does is deprive you of useful security features.
This excercise also achieves absolutely nothing to protect against a hypothetical scenario where Intel and AMD are malicious. Intel and AMD do not need the co-processor to implement a backdoor - they can simply introduce CPU vulnerabilities like Spectre and Meltdown if they want to. If you do not trust a CPU vendor, the only mitigation is to not use said vendor.