|
Authored by: pem on Monday, July 02 2012 @ 10:37 PM EDT |
We have not been able to come up with any scenario where Ubuntu
would be forced to divulge a private signing key because a third-party computer
manufacturer or distributor shipped Ubuntu on a Restricted Boot machine. In
such situations, the computer distributor -- not Canonical or Ubuntu -- would be
the one responsible for providing the information necessary for users to run
modified versions of the software.
They certainly admit that
somebody would have to either warranty the hardware or cough up a key.
What is obvious is that (a) Ubuntu asking the hardware vendor to indemnify them
against having to provide the key in this case reduces the value of Ubuntu to
the hardware manufacturer; and (b) the FSF couldn't care less about this
business problem.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|