I think you're considering can/does in any individual case. My point is that secure boot might represent an overall reduction in security, on average, across all deployments.
As I said, there are foreseeable risks that could turn it into something that caused more problems than it solved. They're easily avoided at the technical level, but I fear commercial concerns might interfere.
Power management, mobile and firmware developer on Linux. Security developer at Aurora. Ex-biologist. mjg59 on Twitter. Content here should not be interpreted as the opinion of my employer. Also on Mastodon.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: Can vs Does
Date: 2012-06-16 12:38 pm (UTC)As I said, there are foreseeable risks that could turn it into something that caused more problems than it solved. They're easily avoided at the technical level, but I fear commercial concerns might interfere.