*countable infinities only

Peter Jones pjones at redhat.com
Thu May 31 16:46:11 UTC 2012

On 05/31/2012 12:16 PM, Gerry Reno wrote:
> On 05/31/2012 12:13 PM, Miloslav Trma─Ź wrote:
>> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Gerry Reno<greno at verizon.net>  wrote:
>>>     http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot-vs-restricted-boot/statement
>>> SecureBoot is not about security.  It is about restriction.
>> That is just untrue.  SecureBoot can be used to make sure you only run
>> the software you intended to run, which is impossible without
>> SecureBoot (e.g. this cannot be done with a TPM).  The idea is solid,
>> the technology is or can be made solid.
> No.  The user is not in control here.  Microsoft is in control.

That's what we said in the working group. I'm not able to expand on that,
as working group conversations are under NDA, but suffice it to say that
argument didn't get us anywhere.


More information about the devel mailing list