Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2012 18:30:19 +0200 From: "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@berklix.com> To: Daniel Feenberg <feenberg@nber.org> Cc: Jerry <jerry@seibercom.net>, Matthew Seaman <matthew@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Is this something we (as consumers of FreeBSD) need to be aware of? Message-ID: <201206061630.q56GUJj7093472@fire.js.berklix.net> In-Reply-To: Your message "Wed, 06 Jun 2012 07:19:58 EDT." <Pine.GSO.4.64.1206060712490.28686@nber6>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I do wonder about that. What incentive does the possesor of a signing key > have to keep it secret? Contract penalty clause maybe ? Lawyers ? Otherwise one of us would purchase a key for $99, & then publish the key so we could all forever more compile & boot our own kernels. But that would presumably break the trap Microsoft & Verisign seek to impose. It seems dangerous. I suspect we (the free source community) will need to campaign, to engage for eg more EU fines against monoplists to force them to back off. I say EU, 'cos they have done it before, so our best bet so far, but it doesnt matter much which governments impose swingeing anti monoploy fines, as long as enough do, to deter MS & verisign etc. Cheers, Julian -- Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultants Munich http://berklix.com Reply below not above, cumulative like a play script, & indent with "> ". Format: Plain text. Not HTML, multipart/alternative, base64, quoted-printable. Mail from @yahoo dumped @berklix. http://berklix.org/yahoo/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201206061630.q56GUJj7093472>