lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Apr]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [GIT PULL] Kernel lockdown for secure boot
On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 09:08:54PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:

> > The fact is, some hardware pushes secure boot pretty hard. That has
> > *nothing* to do with some "lockdown" mode.
>
> Secure Boot ensures that the firmware will only load signed bootloaders. If
> a signed bootloader loads a kernel that's effectively an unsigned
> bootloader, there's no point in using Secure Boot - you should just turn it
> off instead, because it's not giving you any meaningful security. Andy's
> example gives a scenario where by constraining your *userland* sufficiently
> you can get close to having the same guarantees, but that involves you
> having a read-only filesystem and takes you even further away from having a
> general purpose computer.
>
> If you don't want Secure Boot, turn it off. If you want Secure Boot, use a
> kernel that behaves in a way that actually increases your security.

That assumes you *can* turn that shit off. On the hardware where manufacturer
has installed firmware that doesn't allow that SB is a misfeature that has
to be worked around. Making that harder might improve the value of SB to
said manufacturers, but what's the benefit for everybody else?

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-04-03 23:22    [W:0.060 / U:0.184 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site