[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130129044013.GC14395@srcf.ucam.org>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 04:40:13 +0000
From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-efi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Secure Boot: More controversial changes
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 06:05:56PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> These at the very least need some kind of CONFIG_WEAK_SECURE_BOOT
> option or something like that.
Given Eric's views on the kexec patch (and given that there's no point
in the hibernate one if kexec's available...), I'm not planning on
pushing these until there's a plausible story for limiting kexec to
signed images.
--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@...f.ucam.org
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists