> Yes, I agree and already did so when writing the above. That's why I
> made it a recommendation and not a requirement. I also intentionally
> didn't write "vendor". Just whoever provides the blob should sign it.
I still don't really get what signing in general is solving here. Digital
Sorry for being late to answer to my own thread (busy busy busy).
A few notes :
The initial check-in of the kabylake FSP was uploaded with a BSD
license :
https://github.com/IntelFsp/FSP/tree/d88078a708e768c7b6ee5cbc996299d303c3c702/KabylakeFspBinPkg
Later commits added Intel's Restricted Use
On 09.05.2018 01:04, Nico Huber wrote:
> Unless a pointer as described above exists for a given plat-
> form that relies on a blob, all changes* to that platform
> *shall* be refused.
>>
>> I think this is counter-productive, as is removing any old boards that
>> don't
3 matches
Mail list logo