Hello,
I just stumbled across this gem, Eugene Kasperky announced a "unhackable OS".
Finally, Our Own OS – Oh Yes!
I am curious what you think of it, I say that there is nothing that is unhackable.
2 Likes
I also doubt that an OS can be unhackable. This OS could be - just for instance - still be vulnerable to a (double-sided) rowhammer attack.
That being said, many OSs are vulnerable by design, certain flaws can be migitated, altough this results in a not very user-friendly system.
3 Likes
I give it like a week after launch for it to be hacked or otherwise compromised. Saying it can't be hacked is just asking for it to be attacked.
Unless they want it to be hacked because it would be free R&D for security?
5 Likes
What is "unhackable"?
Let's assume it simply means it can not be coerced into doing anything you don't want it to do. This is virtually impossible without restraining the input space severely. What will it then be able to do?
Also, will the hardware it runs on also be as "unhackable"?
How will it provide something of different value than OpenBSD which alleges "Only two remote holes in the default install, in a heck of a long time!" (sic, source: https://www.openbsd.org/ )? Most likely by being micro kernel, but how does it play in?
Is it operation-safe, secure, private, real-time constrained? Is it embedded? Is it general purpose? Is it desktop?
What makes it better than seL4 ( https://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/08/13/0827231/worlds-first-formally-proven-os-kernel , http://ts.data61.csiro.au/projects/TS/l4.verified/ )?
EDIT: http://sel4.systems/ <- seL4 main site.
I am curious to see how it pans out, as I'd like to try it out. I am particularly keen on exploring how they took advantage of a micro-kernel architecture. But currently I am just patiently feeling a hype buildup.
2 Likes
Remember the unsinkable ship that sank on its maiden voyage?
I dunno why I thought of that...
5 Likes
Some heartbleed-like virus will blow this up.
Hmmm.... if they built an operating system off seL4(a provably secure microkernel), I'd be very happy. As it is I don't think they've actually gone that distance.
Would the security of a OS like this interfere with the workflow of a user? The article does not state what the OS was made to do next to being secure.
Right on both counts in my mind. I also give it a week and the claim is definitely a red flag to hackers and hats of various colours. Definitely free pen testing and publicity.
Imma give it a month until someone cracks it.
It does not seem to be intended to be a desktop/user facing OS. The micro kernel architecture and the lack of a GUI, and the first use on a managed L2 switch points strongly towards embedded systems.
That was my first thought - this statement is more like "the pentest is open, come and get us" than anything else.
Uhm, wasn't heartblead a memory leakage by SSL? I mean, not a virus, "just" a fuckup in the most used, underfunded, underaudited code on the internet?
2 Likes
Yeah this OS points to embeded system, not something we could just download and install onto a managed switch. Although, this could be a sign that Kaspersky could usurp CISCO? Not sure, but I'll keep my eye on this.
Saying its un-hackable challenges all those who want to be the first one to do it. So yeah, free R&D.
Heartbleed was not a virus, it was an exploit. What a heartbeat returned back could be coerced into returning data that was out-of-bounds and this 'possibly' leaked more than just junk in memory. Basically they would get return packets of 64K and then they would sift through it to try and find usable data. Its often been referred to as panning for gold.
Good explanation, I already forgot about the details after I patched my shit XD But in the end the server process leaked memory that should have stayed secret because it filled the request with what should have been 0 and not useful data. - right?
Backdoor found in 3...2...
1 Like
If unhackable was a selling point Microsoft will still be peddling RomBasic
2 Likes
Technically everything that runs on some kind of a firmware,
and is connected to a network is hackable basicly.
So i highly doubt that this is really a thing.
However its of course still an interesting thing, and a challenge.
That's pretty much all it'll take :)
1 Like
I gave the article a second look. It's geared towards IoT devices... Remember those IoT devices and their built-in 'Planned-Obsolescence feature?! Yeah those devices that never receive firmware updates because it's replacement device is going to hit store shelves in 2 months... If that business model is erraticated, you can have safer devices, until then... KasperskyOs , laughable.
1 Like
Let the games begin!