linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/6] drm: Add Content Protection property

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 7 Dec 2017 14:30:52 +0000
From:   Alan Cox <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:     Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
Cc:     Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Sean Paul <seanpaul@...omium.org>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...el.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/6] drm: Add Content Protection property

> If you want to actually lock down a machine to implement content
> protection, then you need secure boot without unlockable boot-loader and a
> pile more bits in userspace. 

So let me take my Intel hat off for a moment.

The upstream policy has always been that we don't merge things which
don't have an open usable user space. Is the HDCP encryption feature
useful on its own ? What do users get from it ?

If this is just an enabler for a lump of binary stuff in ChromeOS then I
don't think it belongs, if it is useful standalone then it seems it does
belong ?

Alan