On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 10:27:59PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote: > >> Right, but we're defending the rights of the legitimate owner of that > >> device, > >> which doesn't have to be the same as the end user (e.g. kiosk). > > > > I don't see how you're defending the owner's rights. If the owner wants to > > lock down the device then they should be able to. > kiosks are physically protected
I can lock devices just fine without ressorting to appointing someone else as manager of my crypto chain. TPM itself does *nothing* to lock down devices. If using a TPM for this purpose is more convenient, that's only because of artificial reasons. -- Robert Millan The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all." _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel