lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Nov]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [RFC] Second attempt at kernel secure boot support
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org> writes:

> On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 09:58:17PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
>> On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 21:34:52 +0000
>> Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org> wrote:
>> > I think you've misunderstood. Blacklist updates are append only.
>>
>> I think you've misunderstood - thats a technical detail that merely
>> alters the cost to the people who did something improper.
>
> Winning a case is cold comfort if your software has been uninstallable
> for the years it took to get through the courts. If others want to take
> that risk, fine.

When the goal is to secure Linux I don't see how any of this helps.
Windows 8 compromises are already available so if we turn most of these
arguments around I am certain clever attackers can go through windows to
run compromised kernel on a linux system, at least as easily as the
reverse.

Short of instructing UEFI to stop trusting the Microsoft signing key I
don't see any of the secureboot dance gaining any security of computers
running linux or security from keys being revoked for non-sense reasons.

Eric


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-11-02 10:21    [W:1.222 / U:0.092 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site