Thanks for the correction. On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 23:48, Chris Ball <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > > We would be in a sorry state if thieves could get around our security > > by acquiring developer keys. No, these are two separate functions. > > No, they aren't -- Tabitha is correct. Developer keys have overriden > activation security since the first Bitfrost document: > > http://wiki.laptop.org/go/OLPC_Bitfrost > > The anti-theft system cannot be bypassed as long as #P_SF_CORE is > enabled (and disabling it requires a developer key). This, in > effect, means that a child is free to do any modification to her > machine's userspace (by disabling #P_SF_RUN without a developer > key), but cannot change the running kernel without requesting the > key. The key-issuing process incorporates a 14-day delay to allow > for a slow theft report to percolate up through the system, and is > only issued if the machine is not reported stolen at the end of > that period of time. > > -- > Chris Ball <[email protected]> > One Laptop Per Child >
-- Edward Mokurai (默雷/धर्ममेघशब्दगर्ज/دھرممیگھشبدگر ج) Cherlin Silent Thunder is my name, and Children are my nation. The Cosmos is my dwelling place, the Truth my destination. http://www.earthtreasury.org/ _______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
