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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CA+55aFzJ2sQR13T+20MKEJ5co-f3Ev8rRxQkRCWVaeDSUU3yhQ@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 17:33:20 -0700 From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> To: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...gle.com> Cc: Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>, James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>, Alan Cox <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Justin Forbes <jforbes@...hat.com>, linux-man <linux-man@...r.kernel.org>, joeyli <jlee@...e.com>, LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>, Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, linux-efi <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Kernel lockdown for secure boot On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 5:25 PM, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote: > > Honestly, I don't think the patchset is viable at all in that case. .. or rather, it's probably viable only for distributions that already have reasons to only care about controlled hardware environments, ie Chromebooks etc. But a chome OS install wouldn't care about the whole "secure boot or not" issue anyway, because they'd also control that side, an they might as well just enable it unconditionally. In contrast, the generic distros can't enable it anyway if it breaks random hardware. And it wouldn't be about secure boot or not, but about the random hardware choice. Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists