<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Secure-Boot-Bypass on CuraSec</title><link>https://curasec.metacog.co.kr/tags/secure-boot-bypass/</link><description>Recent content in Secure-Boot-Bypass on CuraSec</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Oct 2026 14:29:02 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://curasec.metacog.co.kr/tags/secure-boot-bypass/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>BlackX UEFI Bootkit Exploits Baton Drop to Bypass Secure Boot</title><link>https://curasec.metacog.co.kr/insights/2026-10-24-blackx-uefi-bootkit-exploits-baton-drop-flaw-to-bypass-secur/</link><pubDate>Sat, 24 Oct 2026 14:29:02 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://curasec.metacog.co.kr/insights/2026-10-24-blackx-uefi-bootkit-exploits-baton-drop-flaw-to-bypass-secur/</guid><description>&lt;ul>
&lt;li>&lt;strong>Engineer — Plan:&lt;/strong> Baton Drop is described as an old flaw, meaning patches exist — audit UEFI firmware versions and apply Secure Boot DBX revocation list updates across physical and bare-metal hosts to block this bypass class.&lt;/li>
&lt;li>&lt;strong>SOC/IR — Plan:&lt;/strong> UEFI bootkits load before the OS and actively interfere with EDR agents; build or review detection coverage for anomalous driver loads at early boot and Secure Boot policy tampering, and consider whether firmware integrity monitoring is in scope.&lt;/li>
&lt;li>&lt;strong>Leader — Learn:&lt;/strong> A nation-state espionage campaign deploying UEFI-level persistence that defeats endpoint security tools is a useful data point for risk conversations, but no vendor breach or immediate organizational action is indicated without sector-specific targeting context.&lt;/li>
&lt;/ul></description></item></channel></rss>