Re: [GIT PULL] Load keys from signed PE binaries

[Matthew Garrett]

On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 08:30:17PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:

> I'm sure many folks have read <http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/12368.html>
> ("Implementing UEFI Secure Boot in Fedora", 2012-30-05) and similar
> analysis and came away with the impression of a rather open, automated
> signing process, like we had/have for ActiveX controls and Java
> Webstart applications.  This may have helped to increase acceptance of
> Microsoft Secure Boot in the technical community.  But lately, in
> direct contradiction to earlier descriptions of the process, a lot of
> talk about "obligations" has appeared.  I understand that you cannot
> go into specifics, but this situation is rather unfortunate for all of
> us.

It's open. If your code ends up signed and is then used to compromise 
the security of other signed operating systems, you're likely to be 
blacklisted. That can't surprise anyone, can it?

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
--
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/