Re: [PATCH 07/11] kexec: Disable in a secure boot environment

[Alan Cox]

> > Well, given that approximately everyone will be booting under EFI within 
> > 18 months, treating it as a niche case seems a little short sighted.

Actually the majority of Linux devices are not PCs 8)

> > secondly, there are already several non-EFI platforms that want to enact 
> > a policy preventing root from being able to arbitrarily replace the 
> > kernel. Given that people are doing this in the wild, it makes sense to 
> > move towards offering that policy in the mainline kernel.
> 
> Either this code makes sense without an appeal to EFI or this code makes
> no sense.

Yes - and the capability is I think the right starting point (although
you'll never make any OS locked down this way even if you are not in fact
violating the GPLv2 license by doing so, which I suspect will be the case
for some implementations)

> So please rework this to come from an angle that makes sense all by
> itself.

I think it needs to be defined in terms of what the capability is
supposed to guarantee. I have a feeling Matthew has a pretty clear idea
about that in his head so can nail it fairly precisely ?

Alan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/