| |||||||||||||
LSS: Secure BootLSS: Secure BootPosted Sep 14, 2012 13:07 UTC (Fri) by corbet (editor, #1)In reply to: LSS: Secure Boot by hummassa Parent article: LSS: Secure Boot Hmm... secure boot-like technologies certainly can play into the copyright maximalist agenda. It's not really a DRM technology, though, it's more of a general control technology — who has control over the systems we think we own? I believe the folks working on making Linux work in the secure environment are doing their best to ensure that the owners have control over their own systems. Secure boot can be used to do unpleasant things; it can also (at least try to) protect your system against the next Sony-style rootkit.
(Log in to post comments)
What everyone needs to know Posted Sep 15, 2012 22:57 UTC (Sat) by CChittleborough (subscriber, #60775) [Link]
To understand the whole Secure-Boot-and-Linux kerfuffle at a high level, all you need to do is read the previous comment carefully.
(Notice that secure boot is an attempt to solve a real problem, not some dastardly plot by mustache-twirling villains, and has real advantages as well as real disadvantages.)
Changing topic: let's all try to avoid making Matthew Garrett's life any harder. Let's all be grateful he's working on this stuff, because we need his work.
LSS: Secure Boot Posted Sep 22, 2012 23:15 UTC (Sat) by ballombe (subscriber, #9523) [Link]
Unless Sony get its virus signed with the microsoft key.
LSS: Secure Boot Posted Sep 23, 2012 12:05 UTC (Sun) by raven667 (subscriber, #5198) [Link]
I don't think there is an incentive for them to do that, the money isn't any where near good enough.
LSS: Secure Boot Posted Sep 23, 2012 14:16 UTC (Sun) by mjg59 (subscriber, #23239) [Link]
I don't understand what you're suggesting. Any binary can be revoked, regardless of who signed it.
|
|||||||||||||