>
> Again, you seem to imply a retrofitted coreboot. If you can tell me any
> model with a firmware lock in particular, I can try to compare it to the
> coreboot situation for that model.
>

I think the most common retrofitted coreboot solution that people use is
for older thinkpads. So it seems reasonable to provide some additional
guidance for people attempting that in the official documentation. The
threat model in baseline is that even if the OS is compromised, it cannot
write to the bios. The vendor's signing keys are considered trusted in this
model, exploits notwithstanding. i.e., You can get to a clean slate by
wiping your hard drive. So with that it mind, it may be useful to help
people achieve a similar goal. In general, the landscape of different
security measures such as vboot, heads etc. is hard to grasp for lay
people. It is not immediately obvious how to use them, or specifically how
they differ in threat models, whether they allow subsequent flashing
without using an external programmer if the hardware doesn't have dedicated
hardware like chromebooks, whether it is possible to have a clean
trusted/airgapped machine for just building and signing coreboot builds
which would be the only trusted builds by your target devices, etc.
_______________________________________________
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org

Reply via email to