PSoC 4系列中的Rootkit漏洞

嗯，我想我也看过那个帖子了。最后，我确定您需要：设备的物理访问，或者软件更新对设备的访问（通过固件更新，或者硬件重编程）。因此，如果您没有更新的固件，那么它是非问题。如果你有固件更新的代码，那就取决于你如何保护更新过程。该漏洞主要针对CyPress的直接控制芯片/内核的监控代码。它可以通过开发者的应用代码，修改，但最终，除非他们有写代码到芯片的能力，他们将无法访问的漏洞。



     以下为原文
  Heh, I think I've read that post too. Ultimately, I determined that you either need: Physical access to the device, or software update access to the device (either through firmware updates, or hardware reprogramming). Thus, if you do not have update-able firmware, then it is a non-issue. And if you do have firmware update-able code, then it comes down to how well you protect that update process. The vulnerability is mainly aimed at Cypress' supervisory code that controls the chips/core directly. It can be modified by the developer's application code, but ultimately, unless they have the ability to write code to the chip, they will not be able to access the vulnerability.

也取决于你从哪里得到筹码，以及他们走到你手上的路径。
不管怎样，我想这个问题只针对真正的特定应用（或高容量），例如军事/航空航天之类的问题，我敢打赌，你可以验证你的芯片（当然，增加了工作，这可能是不合理的，鉴于市场上其他选项的可用性）。我知道这个论坛有一个线索（这个问题的发现者也在评论）。



     以下为原文
  Also depends on where you get your chips from, and the path they travel to your hands.
Anyways, I guess this issue is a problem only for really specific applications (or high volume), such as military / aerospace and the like, and I bet you can verify your chips (although, of course, is added work which may not justify given the availability of other options on the market). I know there's a thread about this in the forum (where the discoverer of the issue also comments).

旅行路线的好点；如果你是从某人那里运送或接收它，那么它可能是可疑的：/虽然，这是校验和验证的一部分，我想（不是任何手段都是万无一失的，但是让它更不容易被愚弄）
这里是论坛的帖子（你提到的）：在低端PSOC4中免费翻倍闪存
从理论上讲，如果您自己使用漏洞来完全使用整个Flash空间（监视器）来编写应用程序代码，那么任何应用rootkit或类似事件的尝试都会导致图像整体的损坏。gt；
但是，对于极其安全的应用程序，需要对代码进行安全检查。
另一方面，如果我是一个安全要求富有的组织，我会培养自己的安全硬件和软件来煽动rootkit的分期防治措施。



     以下为原文
  Good point about the travel path; If you are shipping or receiving it from someone, then it could be suspect :/ Although, this is part of the checksum verification I suppose (not foolproof by any means, but makes it less easy to fool)
Here's the forum thread here (that you mentioned): Double the flash in low-end PSoC4 for free
 
Theoretically, if you used the exploit yourself to fully use the entire flash space (supervisory as well) to write your application code, then any attempts to apply rootkits or similar things would cause  corruption of the image as a whole. >:)
But still, security checking of the code would be required for extremely secure applications
On the other hand, if I was a wealthy organization with a security requirement, I would probably develop my own security hardware and software measures to instigate the prevention of rootkit installments.