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

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

 



> You have a fair chance of protecting via physical means (Locked rooms,
> Background checks on users etc.) of preventing a user with malicious intent
> to access the local machine.

So called "secure boot" doesn't deal with any kind of physical access,
which also means its useless if a device is lost and returned and you
don't know if it was in the hands of a third party.

> The first thing a computer does when switched on is run its first code
> instructions. Commonly referred to as the BIOS.

A good deal more complicated than that. However the signing in hardware
and early boot up on a lot of devices already goes as far as the BIOS if
the system has BIOS or EFI if it doesn't. You also have all the devices
to deal with.

> Normally digital signatures would examine the binary, ensure the signature
> matches, and then run the code contained in it.

No - it's a good deal more complicated than that too.
--
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