Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship




Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-dev
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
From: Florian Philipp <lists@...>
Subject: Re: Re: UEFI secure boot and Gentoo
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 09:54:12 +0200
Am 15.06.2012 06:50, schrieb Duncan:
> Greg KH posted on Thu, 14 Jun 2012 21:28:10 -0700 as excerpted:
> 
>> So, anyone been thinking about this?  I have, and it's not pretty.
>>
>> Should I worry about this and how it affects Gentoo, or not worry about
>> Gentoo right now and just focus on the other issues?
>>
>> Minor details like, "do we have a 'company' that can pay Microsoft to
>> sign our bootloader?" is one aspect from the non-technical side that
>> I've been wondering about.
> 
> I've been following developments and wondering a bit about this myself.
> 
> I had concluded that at least for x86/amd64, where MS is mandating a user 
> controlled disable-signed-checking option, gentoo shouldn't have a 
> problem.  Other than updating the handbook to accommodate UEFI, 
> presumably along with the grub2 stabilization, I believe we're fine as if 
> a user can't figure out how to disable that option on their (x86/amd64) 
> platform, they're hardly likely to be a good match for gentoo in any case.
> 

As a user, I'd still like to have the chance of using Secure Boot with
Gentoo since it _really_ increases security. Even if it means I can no
longer build my own kernel.

> ARM and etc could be more problematic since MS is mandating no-unlock 
> there, last I read.  I have no clue how they can get away with that anti-
> trust-wise, but anyway...  But I honestly don't know enough about other 
> than x86/amd64 platforms to worry about it, personally.
> 

I guess anti-trust is not an issue since MS is not even close to having
a monopoly in ARM.

Regards,
Florian Philipp

Attachment:
signature.asc (OpenPGP digital signature)
Replies:
Re: Re: UEFI secure boot and Gentoo
-- Michał Górny
Re: Re: UEFI secure boot and Gentoo
-- Walter Dnes
References:
UEFI secure boot and Gentoo
-- Greg KH
Re: UEFI secure boot and Gentoo
-- Duncan
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: Re: UEFI secure boot and Gentoo
Next by thread:
Re: Re: UEFI secure boot and Gentoo
Previous by date:
Re: ebuild laziness and binpkg overhead
Next by date:
Re: UEFI secure boot and Gentoo


Updated Jun 29, 2012

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-dev mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.