[lkml]   [2012]   [Nov]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC] Second attempt at kernel secure boot support
On 11/02/2012 09:48 AM, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 03:02:25PM -0600, Chris Friesen wrote:

>> With secure boot enabled, then the kernel should refuse to let an
>> unsigned kexec load new images, and kexec itself should refuse to
>> load unsigned images.
> Yep, good in theory. Now that basically means reimplementing kexec-tools
> in kernel.

Maybe I'm missing something, but couldn't the vendors provide a signed
kexec? Why does extra stuff need to be pushed into the kernel?


 \ /
  Last update: 2012-11-02 18:21    [W:0.710 / U:0.148 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site