On Thu, 2012-06-07 at 15:16 -0500, Chris Adams wrote: > Once upon a time, Adam Jackson <ajax@xxxxxxxxxx> said: > > If there are ARM machines where UEFI and Secure Boot are available, > > we're going to have tools to do your own trust database management > > anyway, so why would supporting them be any different from doing the > > same on x86? > > For Windows 8 certification on ARM, Microsoft is going to require UEFI > with Secure Boot enabled _and_ no method for users to disable Secure > Boot or enroll their own keys (the opposite of x86 where they require a > disable method and custom key enrollment support). And? I wasn't speaking to "we should sign our arm images with Microsoft's key", I was speaking to "we should support Secure Boot on arm". If someone wants to build an arm machine with SB support capable of running non-Windows operating systems, why would we not want to run there, and why would enabling that look any different from self-signing an x86 machine? - ajax
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
