Brendan Perrine schreef op 15-07-2016 8:26:
Yes and secure boot is different for different usecases. I can see secure boot being geniunely useful for an atm on end not that I think there are implementations that use ubuntu that I know about. But if say you boot a malicous live os on the atm then have it empty all of its money that is a problem. On the other end of the extreme physical acess attacks like this are really unlikely on my desktop in a residental home in the suburbs. I see it as being more likely to be annoying and not provide any useful security on the desktop while it could be useful on the atm.
The point was also that maybe you should prevent this from happening in the first place. If anyone is able to load a new OS/kernel on an ATM then you already have a massive breach of security.
I am simply suggesting that focussing on secure boot is focussing on the wrong area.
-- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
