On 06/01/2012 09:15 AM, Alan Cox wrote:
Now a signed bootloader has its uses, however in a properly designed
system you would allow the user to import their own keys.
If it goes banana, I'm pretty confident this will be required by law in
most sane countries. There are good organizations of activists out
there, and even some who seek a new purpose[0]. Well, that's a good one
right there.
I don't think we're that lost yet. I hope I'm not being naive, and
you're certainly right in that we should watch this closely and shout
loudly if it doesn't go in the right direction. We should not, however,
give up already.
Even if this goes extremely bad, firmwares will be hacked. The tech
world always goes on with technical solutions, whether the politics
follow or not. I mean this thing affects *everyone*, it's not a lost fight.
I am sure MS will use this for the Windows 9 era to say "See
secure boot
works for everyone, now make it mandatory". Matthew Garrett
unintentionally just gave them everything they needed to continue that
plan.
I think that's a little fallacious and a big shortcut. Well, my opinion
on that is in another post of this thread already, should you want to
read it.
Alan
[0]
http://video.fosdem.org/2012/maintracks/janson/A_New_OSI_for_A_New_Decade...
--
t