Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by fsflover 369 days ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44246281
2 comments

What you've described in that comment is just kind of reinventing the wheel. You're solving the same problem a different way, in a way that has slightly more complexity than just using UEFI and secureboot.
The main difference is that the user owns the root of trust and doesn't have to blindly trust a (buggy) proprietary software from a commercial company. Also, the community review.
You could still have that with UEFI though.
But not with Secure Boot AFAIK.
Well, yeah, you could, that was the point of my comment.

Coreboot supports secure boot, so why isn't that sufficient?

Secure Boot is closed and not auditable.
Ah, I thought you were replying to the full quote