Alex Hudson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > if you're supplying firewalls to > people, and the firewalls are meddle-proof (which IMHO is a feature, in > this instance), you'd be more or less forced to provide per-user > binaries signed with different keys in order to comply (as I understand > it, anyway), which is a bit of a burden. I suppose there are likely > other technological solutions to that problem, though.
It is a trivial burden because it's automate-able. Also we're only talking about hardware manufacturers - people who have accepted the much bigger burden of making a physical device. -- Ciarán O'Riordan __________________ \ http://fsfeurope.org/projects/gplv3 http://ciaran.compsoc.com/ _________ \ GPLv3 and other work supported by http://fsfe.org/fellows/ciaran/weblog \ Fellowship: http://www.fsfe.org _______________________________________________ Fsfe-uk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fsfe-uk
