The issue reported here is that /boot is not encrypted in the supported
configurations. Which is meh - we don't have much authenticated
encryption, so boot can still be manipulated. Sealed TPM measurements
address the problem of verifying the bootloader, kernel, initrd, and the
configuration better. It does not provide security by obfuscation as
encryption does, but that obfuscation can be circumvented - you can
modify an encrypted boot partition and still get a working system - and
authenticated encryption that would also authenticate the content is not
stable yet.

I cannot say much on the other issue raised in recent comments on dual
boot setups not installing encrypted, but I fail to see how it's related
to this bug report

I do want to point out that with devices now being sold with BitLocker
out of the box, that you do have to disable BitLocker first to even get
the ability to install another OS, so I fail to see how that improves
the situation for dual boot users who need encryption.

But in any case adding comments to bugs that are unrelated to the bug is
not really helpful, you end up with nobody knowing what people are
talking about anymore.

Hence my suggestion would be to open a new bug report against ubiquity
describing the dual boot setup issues so that that can be tracked on its
own and we don't have to discuss two bugs in one bug report.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1773457

Title:
  Full-system encryption needs to be supported out-of-the-box including
  /boot and should not delete other installed systems

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/1773457/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to