On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 1:56 AM Florian Weimer <fweimer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > * Neal Gompa: > > > I treat Secure Boot purely as a compatibility interface. We need to do > > just enough to get through the secure boot environment. > > Right. It's not even clear to me why we enforce kernel module > signatures in Secure Boot mode, and disable a few other kernel features. If users can load arbitrary unsigned kernel modules or hibernation images, it silently circumvents UEFI Secure Boot. I agree this is a frustrating paradigm for users who want certain features like using 3rd party modules with a Fedora kernel, or using locked down kernel features, but I'm not sure what the alternative is. -- Chris Murphy _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
