On Thu, 4 Jan 2018, Jon Masters wrote: > P.S. I've an internal document where I've been tracking "nice to haves" > for later, and one of them is whether it makes sense to tag binaries as > "trusted" (e.g. extended attribute, label, whatever). It was something I > wanted to bring up at some point as potentially worth considering.
Scratch that. There is no such thing as a trusted binary.
