Security Processor Boot Policy Enforcement Against Firmware Hijacking
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing firmware policy enforcement mechanisms are susceptible to malware attacks, allowing malicious entities to hijack firmware and insert malicious code, as they rely on operating system processes that can be exploited.
Innovation Solution
A security processor is utilized to enforce firmware policies by determining compliance with specified policies during the boot session, executing compliant firmware and performing mitigations on non-compliant firmware, while isolating itself from operating system vulnerabilities.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Ease of operation
If operating system processes are used to enforce firmware policies, then policy enforcement capability is provided, but security is weakened due to susceptibility to malware attacks
Solution Approach 1:
The system divides the enforcement mechanism into two separate components: a security processor that performs policy evaluation and a second processor that executes firmware. This segmentation isolates the security-critical functions from the operating system environment, preventing malware from compromising the policy enforcement while maintaining the capability to enforce firmware policies.
Solution Approach 2:
The security processor acts as an intermediary between the firmware to be executed and the operating system. It evaluates firmware against security policies before allowing execution, thereby mediating the trust relationship and blocking malicious code without requiring the operating system itself to perform security checks.
2Reliability
If a security processor is introduced to enforce policies, then security is improved, but device complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The security processor is designed to perform multiple functions: loading firmware, evaluating it against security policies, and controlling its execution. By consolidating these security-related functions into a single multi-functional component, the system achieves improved security without proportionally increasing overall device complexity.
Data Source
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3~4
AI summary
Embodiments described herein are directed to firmware policy enforcement of a computing device. For example, a security processor of the computing device is utilized to boot the computing device. During a boot session, the security processor loads and executes specialized firmware. The specialized firmware, when executed, causes the security processor to determine whether other types of firmware to be executed on the computing device is in compliance with a policy specified by the specialized firmware. Based at least on a determination that the other firmware is in compliance with the policy, the security processor executes the other firmware. Based at least on a determination that the other firmware is not in compliance with the policy, the security processor performs a mitigation with respect to the other firmware.