[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] docs: UEFI Secure Boot security policy
- To: Ross Lagerwall <ross.lagerwall@xxxxxxxxx>
- From: Marek Marczykowski-Górecki <marmarek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2025 16:36:39 +0200
- Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx>, Michal Orzel <michal.orzel@xxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>, Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, security@xxxxxxx, Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx>, Trammell Hudson <hudson@xxxxxxxx>, Frediano Ziglio <frediano.ziglio@xxxxxxxxx>, Gerald Elder-Vass <gerald.elder-vass@xxxxxxxxx>, Kevin Lampis <kevin.lampis@xxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Thu, 19 Jun 2025 14:36:56 +0000
- Feedback-id: i1568416f:Fastmail
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 03:16:51PM +0100, Ross Lagerwall wrote:
> I think a section on PCI passthrough is also warranted. i.e. preventing misuse
> of a device to exploit Secure Boot.
While I agree it makes sense, I wonder if it's in scope for UEFI
Secure Boot as defined by Microsoft? It may have implication for example
on PCI passthrough to a PV domains.
--
Best Regards,
Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
Invisible Things Lab
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
|
