Is this something we (as consumers of FreeBSD) need to be aware of?

Chad Perrin perrin at
Wed Jun 6 20:42:29 UTC 2012

On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 02:23:20PM +0200, Damien Fleuriot wrote:
> I agree with the whole post except that last bit about ICANN Matthew.
> The US already has enough dominance as is, without involving ICANN, a
> supposedly neutral body (yeah right...) any further.

Indeed.  The last thing we need is some self-appointed "authority"
purporting to have the last word on what qualifies as "secure".  There is
no need for a third-party certification of secure booting.  If there is
need for such a secure booting mechanism at all, it is a need for the
ability of end-of-chain device owners to be able to set their own keys,
without the involvement of any third parties, and an out-of-band key
verification mechanism.  Once again, I feel it incumbent upon me to point
to examples like OpenPGP's keyserver network as the counter-proposal to a
cetifying "authority" charging money to allow people to control their own
system security in what amounts to a vacant lot scam.

Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: ]

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list