Blame 0004-We-should-be-checking-both-mok-and-the-system-s-SB-s.patch

fecdfb1
From 83b3a7cf6d4d4e91579864cfc75dadf2b7304da9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
fecdfb1
From: Peter Jones <pjones@redhat.com>
fecdfb1
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 10:41:03 -0400
fecdfb1
Subject: [PATCH 4/5] We should be checking both mok and the system's SB
fecdfb1
 settings
fecdfb1
fecdfb1
When we call hook_system_services(), we're currently only checking mok's
fecdfb1
setting.  We should use secure_mode() instead so it'll check both.
fecdfb1
fecdfb1
Signed-off-by: Peter Jones <pjones@redhat.com>
fecdfb1
---
fecdfb1
 shim.c | 2 +-
fecdfb1
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
fecdfb1
fecdfb1
diff --git a/shim.c b/shim.c
fecdfb1
index 537177d..9d0d884 100644
fecdfb1
--- a/shim.c
fecdfb1
+++ b/shim.c
fecdfb1
@@ -1718,7 +1718,7 @@ EFI_STATUS efi_main (EFI_HANDLE image_handle, EFI_SYSTEM_TABLE *passed_systab)
fecdfb1
 	/*
fecdfb1
 	 * Tell the user that we're in insecure mode if necessary
fecdfb1
 	 */
fecdfb1
-	if (insecure_mode) {
fecdfb1
+	if (!secure_mode()) {
fecdfb1
 		Print(L"Booting in insecure mode\n");
fecdfb1
 		uefi_call_wrapper(BS->Stall, 1, 2000000);
fecdfb1
 	} else {
fecdfb1
-- 
fecdfb1
1.8.3.1
fecdfb1