2012/3/9 Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > On Fri, 9 Mar 2012 11:07:55 +0100 ... > will be locked down by default and require some undefined > screwing around to unlock. For x86 the spec currently does require they > can be unlocked... ... > Module signing itself isn't just useful for that though - its a matter of > who owns the key and you can do your own module signing with your own key > irrespective of the bogus 'secure boot' stuff. > > In theory you can even stuff said keys into the TPM and do very clever > tricks with them. > > Alan I fully agree with you but the question is "Why should we do this on linux?" Let the windoof people do whatever they want... You see that the module signing is more a less a measure against the so called "windows OEM-SLP activation with modded bootloaders". I don't see any benefit for linux but an extra burden to have to find ways to unlock this bogus 'secure boot' stuff. --joshua -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
