Counter argument to patching embedded devices

  • Be sure to checkout “Tips & Tricks”
    Dear Guest Visitor → Once you register and log-in please checkout the “Tips & Tricks” page for some very handy tips!

    /Steve.
  • BootAble – FreeDOS boot testing freeware

    To obtain direct, low-level access to a system's mass storage drives, SpinRite runs under a GRC-customized version of FreeDOS which has been modified to add compatibility with all file systems. In order to run SpinRite it must first be possible to boot FreeDOS.

    GRC's “BootAble” freeware allows anyone to easily create BIOS-bootable media in order to workout and confirm the details of getting a machine to boot FreeDOS through a BIOS. Once the means of doing that has been determined, the media created by SpinRite can be booted and run in the same way.

    The participants here, who have taken the time to share their knowledge and experience, their successes and some frustrations with booting their computers into FreeDOS, have created a valuable knowledgebase which will benefit everyone who follows.

    You may click on the image to the right to obtain your own copy of BootAble. Then use the knowledge and experience documented here to boot your computer(s) into FreeDOS. And please do not hesitate to ask questions – nowhere else can better answers be found.

    (You may permanently close this reminder with the 'X' in the upper right.)

That sounds like so much baffle-gaff. You should not be designing a system, even an embedded one, so close to the minimal specs that a small change like new firmware will alter system capabilities in a measurable way. If you're counting pennies that closely, then you need to consider whether your system should be put on the market at all. Spending an extra, say $5-10, to double the flash storage so you can have a backup system image and also to increase the system CPU so it can handle a little variability in memory access speeds is just spending some money for good future proofing for the life of your system.
 
I recently attended a conference where I met an engineer that had a bad experience with 2FA. Apparently, during a Hurricane the 2FA system failed and the technicians couldn't access a critical system. So, there are use cases where a little weaker security is appropriate.
 
Question, was it the type of 2FA that required access to a 3rd party system (something that wasn't self-contained to the system)? Or was it something that wasn't talked about?
 
Question, was it the type of 2FA that required access to a 3rd party system (something that wasn't self-contained to the system)? Or was it something that wasn't talked about?
The type of 2FA wasn't disclosed, yet from his statement it required coms with a remote server.
 
Any time it requires comms with a remote server, that's 3rd party in my eyes. I hate that style because if I'm on my tablet, and I'm nowhere near my phone, I might need to get up, and maybe walk to the other end of my house to react to the prompt on my phone to log into a site. TOTP is often the best MFA for me, and my YubiKey if I'm on a computer, as I won't need to unlock my phone to access TOTP or whatever app I had to install.