Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GNOME Software To Better Support NVIDIA's Proprietary Linux Driver

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • GNOME Software To Better Support NVIDIA's Proprietary Linux Driver

    Phoronix: GNOME Software To Better Support NVIDIA's Proprietary Linux Driver

    As a planned change for Fedora 41, Red Hat engineers are working on upstream GNOME Software better supporting the NVIDIA proprietary driver installation by allowing the installation to work gracefully with UEFI Secure Boot enabled systems...

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite

  • #2
    Remind me again why Red Hat is investing into the anti-consumer bug inSecure Boot?

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
      Remind me again why Red Hat is investing into the anti-consumer bug inSecure Boot?

      Sure. You may not be aware but Secure Boot has been an integral part of UEFI since 2012. UEFI (Unified Extensible Firmware Interface) is the modern replacement for BIOS (Basic Input/Output System) which was first designed by Gary Kildall in 1975 for CP/M.

      1975....for f'ing C...P...M.

      Let that sink in.

      You ask why Red Hat is investing in what you call (anti-consumer bug inSecure Boot?). Because every fucking computer that has been made regardless of any pre-installed OS or none at all, since 2012 has Secure Boot by default.

      Here's my remedy for your condition.

      1: Have a beer

      2: Get laid

      3: Get over it

      Comment


      • #4
        I don't use and don't pretend to use Nvidia in a near future, but I'm glad with anything that can improve it's users experience on Linux. Specially considering that a lot of them are using due to the "monopoly" of the notebook market.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
          Remind me again why Red Hat is investing into the anti-consumer bug inSecure Boot?
          It's not a Red Hat requirement but more a support of an "12 years already on the consumer market and enabled by default since then" existing tech which for example, it's a requirement for Microsoft (of course) Intune to make our machines compliant to be able to use them with the company's resources.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
            Remind me again why Red Hat is investing into the anti-consumer bug inSecure Boot?
            Continue to have zero confidence that what you're running is what you're running.

            And never touch anything security related.

            Secure Boot is not something which is exclusive to Microsoft and Windows. It's a PC/EFI thing.

            Comment


            • #7
              The last time I installed the NVIDIA binary drivers, I entered a password, and then when the machine rebooted, it either didn't accept the password, or didn't even ask me for the password, I forget which. Therefore, it left signing enabled, breaking the NVIDIA driver. And I couldn't figure out how to make it try again.

              Comment


              • #8
                I wonder if this functionality can be extended to other applications that rely on unsigned drivers (VMware Workstation, VirtualBox, and the likes) to further improve users experience.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by avis View Post

                  Continue to have zero confidence that what you're running is what you're running.

                  And never touch anything security related.

                  Secure Boot is not something which is exclusive to Microsoft and Windows. It's a PC/EFI thing.
                  inSecure Boot isn't a security feature, it's a locked bootloader that got enough push back that we could turn it off. The only thing it protects against is you the user because the associated attack vector assumes you have root.

                  Linux vendors have for the most part done what's necessary to get it to work and then no more, but now Red Hat seems to be interested in quite a bit more than merely "making it work" and instead is actively chasing it with stuff like UKIs.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post

                    inSecure Boot isn't a security feature, it's a locked bootloader that got enough push back that we could turn it off. The only thing it protects against is you the user because the associated attack vector assumes you have root.

                    Linux vendors have for the most part done what's necessary to get it to work and then no more, but now Red Hat seems to be interested in quite a bit more than merely "making it work" and instead is actively chasing it with stuff like UKIs.
                    From its inception, and to this day, Secure Boot has been allowed to be disabled. I haven't seen a single x86 PC where it can't be disabled.

                    Continue to live in your fantasy conspiracy evil world where Secure Boot is about "control", "lock downs", "no freedom", but please stop your screaming here which is totally unrelated to this discussion. Some people actually want Secure Boot. You're free to run as many rootkits as you possibly can.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X