Re: [RFC] Second attempt at kernel secure boot support

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



* James Bottomley:

> Right, but what I'm telling you is that by deciding to allow automatic
> first boot, you're causing the windows attack vector problem.  You could
> easily do a present user test only on first boot which would eliminate
> it.

Apparently, the warning will look like this:

  WARNING: This Binary is unsigned

  Are you sure you wish to run an unsigned binary
  in a secure environment?

  To avoid this question in future place the platform into setup mode
  See http://www.linuxfoundation.org/uefi-setup-mode
  And reboot.

I'm not convinced this will work because users will confirm their
presence to get back into the system.  We expect GNU/Linux users to do
it, why wouldn't Windows users?  (And what harm can an unsigned binary
do to a "secure environment", anyway?  If it's adversely affected, it
can't be that secure, can it?)

And what's the backup plan if users use this to boot into compromised
Windows systems?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-efi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux