On Thu, 2012-05-31 at 20:56 -0700, JD wrote:
FWIW, perhaps - just perhaps - this is an attempt by MS and redhat
(and perhaps others like Oracle), to try an convince government
customers that a system with a signed bootloader and kernel and
modules, provides for such greater security, that the gov should spend
the money to revamp all their installations.
Given Microsoft's past history (decades of it), I find it very hard to
believe that anything that /they/ think is a good idea, is a good idea.
Their track record for security is abysmal, likewise with usability.
--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.