http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=54836 --- Comment #9 from Hans Leidekker <hans@meelstraat.net> --- (In reply to Zeb Figura from comment #7)
(In reply to Swiftb0y from comment #6)
Sure, what do you propose?
It may be reasonable to treat any builtin DLL as signed. It may also be reasonable to distribute packages with builtin DLLs signed by a signature that Wine treats as trustworthy.
Treating builtin dlls as signed introduces discrepancies such as missing security dll section and missing catalog hash. Wine distributors that make use of dll signing would need to override it. Wine already treats builtin dll signatures as trustworthy if the certificate chain leads to a trusted root CA but these signing certificates cost money and it seems unlikely that Linux distributions would take on this task. An alternative might be to include a script that generates a self-signed signing certificate when Wine is installed, signs Wine dlls with it and adds the corresponding CA to the local trust database. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.