| 1 |
On Monday 30 Mar 2015 01:52:14 Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 8:32 PM, Walter Dnes <waltdnes@××××××××.org> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Be careful what you wish for. I have my doubts that TPM chips would |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > boot linux with Microsoft offering "volume discounts" to OEMS. Call me |
| 6 |
> > cynical. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> TPM chips don't control what boots. They just accept the hash of the |
| 9 |
> bootloader reported by the firmware and store it (and that is it as |
| 10 |
> far as the OEM's contribution to the process). |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Rich, the problem with TPM as I understand it is that the private key in the |
| 13 |
TPM chip is not yours, generated on your trusted platform, but the TPM |
| 14 |
manufacturer's and is burned into the TPM chip at the time of production. If |
| 15 |
the TPM OEMs are in US or within the sphere of influence of the US, then I |
| 16 |
would consider this key as good as compromised. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
-- |
| 19 |
Regards, |
| 20 |
Mick |
Archives