Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 30

Thread: Debian Developers Discuss UEFI SecureBoot Plans

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,115

    Default Debian Developers Discuss UEFI SecureBoot Plans

    Phoronix: Debian Developers Discuss UEFI SecureBoot Plans

    Debian developers today at DebConf 12, aside from talking about the future Debian codename, discussed what to do about UEFI booting for Debian Linux...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTEzNjU

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    353

    Default

    debian always chooses ideology over common sense. so it is no wonder that they'll have the most awkward solution for secureboot.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    3

    Default Secure boot benefits nobody

    Debian hasn't stated exactly what approach they will take with the whole secure boot/UEFI mess so it's a bit silly to criticize them at this point. The whole proprietary bootloader nonsense was enforced by those pigs at Microsoft since they never want to play fairly and are scared of the rising momentum that GNU/Linux has. Tampering with the open architecure of the PC to ensure only one OS can be used is blatant anti-competitve behavior by Microsoft and I hope they suffer a nasty retaliation for the shenanigans they constantly pull.

    Sure, many GNU/Linux distros can use their own bootloader key to enable alternative os installations by why should they have to jump through hoops because of one companies insistence on locking out competition ? Microsoft does not own the PC architecture and should stay the hell away from trying to make it customized to their platforms.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    205

    Default

    I can only say it again, on x86 hardware Microsoft is actively forcing the hardware manufacturers to not lock out other systems, if they want to get the Windows 8 logo for their hardware. Why is everyone bitching about Microsoft but no one actually reading their documentation?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    353

    Default

    because the leader of the open source movement eats toe fongus. it's always easier to wage a holy war than to make a product that the masses enjoy using.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    .ca
    Posts
    405

    Default

    Simply put: SecureBoot = clusterfuck.

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by garegin View Post
    because the leader of the open source movement eats toe fongus. it's always easier to wage a holy war than to make a product that the masses enjoy using.
    Free software and open source are not the same thing, and RMS and ESR *definitely* aren't the same person.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    418

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
    I can only say it again, on x86 hardware Microsoft is actively forcing the hardware manufacturers to not lock out other systems, if they want to get the Windows 8 logo for their hardware. Why is everyone bitching about Microsoft but no one actually reading their documentation?
    And you will guarantee, that once all the hardware/infastructure is in place, windows 9, 10 or maybe even 11 all of a sudden will require manufactures to have that feature ON to receive the silly sticker? Can you?

    Thought so.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    205

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oliver View Post
    And you will guarantee, that once all the hardware/infastructure is in place, windows 9, 10 or maybe even 11 all of a sudden will require manufactures to have that feature ON to receive the silly sticker? Can you?

    Thought so.
    Have I stated that? How should I guarantee that? Do you think I am Steve Ballmer? I have stated clearly that this is for the Windows 8 logo, shouldn't be hard to understand. People are spreading enough FUD about Secure Boot already, do you want to start now with spreading that about later Windows versions? You don't know what will happen then, I don't know what will happen then, so guessing around is of no use.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    418

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
    Have I stated that? How should I guarantee that? Do you think I am Steve Ballmer? I have stated clearly that this is for the Windows 8 logo, shouldn't be hard to understand. People are spreading enough FUD about Secure Boot already, do you want to start now with spreading that about later Windows versions? You don't know what will happen then, I don't know what will happen then, so guessing around is of no use.
    NOFI, but don't be so naive ... They already require it on ARM. Chances are pretty good, if they have their way, it will be a requirement sooner rather then later. That's just how the beast works. They don't do it know, because of all the antitrust shit that will rain over them. They are hoping/guessing/betting, that in a few years, they can encourage OEM to enable it by default claiming 'see, less piratism, less virusses etc happened because of secure boot' and a few years after that, lock the platform entirely.

    But you are right. We don't know for sure what will happen. For all we know Microsoft will play nice and .... right, sure it may be possible, but extremly unlikly. Embrace, Enhance and what was that last one again?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •