On Thu, Aug 04, 2022 at 03:32:32AM -0500, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 05:29:15PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 06:15:24PM +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > > > <os firmware='efi'> > > > <firmware> > > > + <feature enabled='yes' name='secure-boot'/> > > > <feature enabled='no' name='enrolled-keys'/> > > > </firmware> > > > </os> > > > > If we want secureboot disabled, this looks wrong. It just enables > > secureboot, but without any keys. We need enabled=no to ask for > > a firmware without SecureBoot at all. > > Mh. From a practical standpoint, the scenarios > > * firmware has secure boot support but there are no enrolled keys > * firmware doesn't have secure boot support > > are pretty much equivalent: either way, unsigned code will be allowed > to run. Yes & no - one allows you to enroll custom keys, the other doesn't allow it. For most people that distinction doesn't matter but it is a significant difference. I don't mind documenting both, but we should explain why we are illustrating two different mechanisms, as when the question is "how to I disable secureboot" an answer saying "secure_boot enabled=yes" simply looks wrong. With regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
