From 1be510f9529cb082f802408b472a77d074b394c0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nicolas Vigier Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:46:12 +0000 Subject: Add zarb MLs html archives --- zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016933.html | 103 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 103 insertions(+) create mode 100644 zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016933.html (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016933.html') diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016933.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016933.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..829545a8d --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-June/016933.html @@ -0,0 +1,103 @@ + + + + [Mageia-dev] Mageia 3 feature proposals review + + + + + + + + + +

[Mageia-dev] Mageia 3 feature proposals review

+ Olav Vitters + olav at vitters.nl +
+ Wed Jun 27 18:45:10 CEST 2012 +

+
+ +
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 08:35:35AM +0200, AL13N wrote:
+> I thought they were planning on signing all the stuff after grub2 as well?
+> 
+> I have no trouble having signed bootloader. but i would prefer it to be from a 
+> completely free CA. ie: NOT from microsoft.
+
+Then you need to convince all the hardware manufacturers to put your key
+in their hardware, as explained in the blogpost. Seems really unlikely
+to happen.
+
+> above signing from microsoft, I would even prefer to have a documentation that 
+> requests to disable Secure Boot, then generate your own key and adding that, 
+> and then setting up Secure Boot again, with your own personal signed stuff.
+
+Thought disabling secure boot means first booting?
+
+> of course, if there was an independant org that had it's CA in all hardware, 
+> and signed all free OSes, that would be alot better.
+
+There is none.
+
+-- 
+Regards,
+Olav
+
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+

+ +
+More information about the Mageia-dev +mailing list
+ -- cgit v1.2.1