In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Kenneth R. van Wyk" writes:
>FYI, eWeek has an interesting article on Intel's "System Integrity Services,"
>which aims to add hardware level protection against rootkits. Now, it seems
>to me that they're bundling all sorts of nasty critters in with their
>definition of "rootkit" but it's worth reading, IMHO.
>
>The detection mechanism seems to primarily be looking primarily for non-OS
>software modifying OS inhabited memory blocks. Wonder how they're definining
>(and maintaining the definition) of each... I also wonder how it'll impact
>near-OS software installations like, say, device drivers, authentication
>plug-ins, and other things that need to poke pretty deeply into the OS in
>order to install.
>
>Anyway, here's a URL to the article.
>
>http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1900533,00.asp
>
Put another way, Sony's DRM stunt, though ill-conceived and poorly
executed, would have been *authorized* if they'd cleaned up the
permission request just a little bit.
--Steve Bellovin, http://www.stevebellovin.com
_______________________________________________
Secure Coding mailing list (SC-L)
[email protected]
List information, subscriptions, etc - http://krvw.com/mailman/listinfo/sc-l
List charter available at - http://www.securecoding.org/list/charter.php
