Platform security of Maemo 6

[Satchel]

I went through the suggestion of having patches for DBus accessible. How much are these people working for the security as far as the maemo 6 operating system is concerned they are working with kernel, dbus, DEs, additional security model deployments , and Distributions?Is there any idea to merge the concept as far as these security models are concerned and their deployment ? Are desktop manufacturers are showing any kind of interest in implementing this security model? Is there interest or agreement from new security implementers for applications such as armor and selinux .

[kraal]

If there are looking to do so It could incur a big amount of cost if upstream needs backwards mismatched modifications to be approved. It will also a incur vast expenditure to Nokia and its users This start by permitting a community kernel to be set on an agreement by a community key and for the end-user to have common agreement that has trusted implementation is still at work. Rootkits will not such a good news for this platform.

[Author]

The community need to make employ of all features of "closed mode" where there is a general objective (for instance the reason of given that rootkit defense for users of substitute kernels but those users are not themselves programmers ). For this there would require to be the capability to set and store some supplementary cryptographic keys given by the user (most probably in "open mode" to do that), the confirmation code (in NOLO) requires to optimally select the accurate key to carry out confirmation with for the image it is starting (authenticate each key found in a nearby stored depository unless l you obtain a match perhaps too slow at bootup.and there will require to be at least one extra form to mean "any confirmed kernel image".

[Deep123]

Where "closed mode" or you can say "vendor mode" si only going to boot images that confirmed with a vendor (concealed/closed/underground/absolute to community) key. These will be characteristic of NOLO, since the trusted implementation requires to begin from there, this implies Nokia would require to give details/documentation of how that functions to the community. On the other hand the community will try hard would require to look for to substitution NOLO (since the characteristic of Trusted Execution will not be obtainable to them otherwise).

[Luis234]

Users should be able to make their device valueless in case if it is stolen , both in terms of data content and in terms of not permitting a thief to flash it again the phone to resell it. Also included in this is the capability to lockdown the complete device hardware (i.e. need release code on power up) during a Mobile Network Operator block the SIM from recording on the network. All this when joint with a handset and a SIM card.