Originally posted by duby229
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The State Of Linux Distributions Handling SecureBoot
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by mjg59 View Post
Yeah, we're so fucked that there's already mainstream Linux distributions that boot out of the box on Secure Boot systems.
Comment
-
Originally posted by mjg59 View PostRepeating the same thing over and over doesn't make it true. I've explained why and how this improves security.Last edited by duby229; 28 December 2012, 04:10 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by duby229 View PostVisa-versa... You repeating the same crap over and over still doesnt make MS's security flaws a problem that linux has to deal with. It DOESNT improve security for LINUX. It just prevents linux from booting. Period. Which I believe full heartedly that was the entire intention in the first place...
Comment
-
Originally posted by mjg59 View PostWhy do you think these attacks are any less plausible on Linux?
It doesnt matter. Its not MS's place to decide for linux. period.
If the linux community wants to take the time to derive a solution of there own, they will. If it becomes a large enough problem that action needs taken, it will be takenLast edited by duby229; 28 December 2012, 04:20 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by duby229 View PostIt doesnt matter. Its not MS's place to decide for linux. period.
Comment
-
Originally posted by mjg59 View PostThey didn't. They decided for Microsoft. But, as I explained, there's no way for them to implement this security mechanism without also placing certain requirements on any other trusted binaries that those machines will boot out of the box.
"Oh my imaginary friend told me I had to do it occifer! STOP IT YOUR STANDING ON HIM!!!"
Comment
-
Originally posted by duby229 View PostAn imaginary boot loader virus didnt decide nothing.
http://www.securelist.com/en/analysi...ws_x64_Bootkit describes one in detail.
Comment
Comment