ZDNet Seems to Say Secure Boot Still Sucks for Open Source

Subject: General Tech, Systems | January 1, 2013 - 12:01 AM |
Tagged: Secure Boot, uefi

Steven J Vaughan-Nichols of ZDNet published an update on the status of Secure Boot. Fans of Linux and other open-source operating systems have been outspoken against potential attempts by Microsoft to hinder the installation of free software. While the fear is not unfounded, the situation does not feel to be a house of cards in terms of severity.

Even without an immediate doomsday, there still is room for improvement.

View Full Size

The largest complaint is with Windows RT. If a manufacturer makes a device for Windows RT it will pretty much not run any other operating system. Vice versa, if an OEM does not load Windows RT on their device that PC will never have it. Windows on ARM is about as closed of a platform as you can get.

On the actual topic of Secure Boot, distributions of Linux have been able to sign properly as trusted. Unlike the downstream Fedora 18, Ubuntu 12.10, and others: the Linux Foundation is still awaiting a signed bootloader.

Other distributions will need to disable the boot encryption which many thought would forever be the only way to precede. While not worse than what we have been used to without Secure Boot, disabling boot encryption leaves Linux at a disadvantage for preventing rootkits. Somewhat ironic, we are stuck between the fear of being locked out of our device by a single entity and the fear of malice intentions not being locked out.

Source: ZDNet

Video News

January 1, 2013 | 01:38 PM - Posted by arbiter

Correct me if i am wrong, but isn't the Ipad same way? So why does MS take so much flack when apple has done same thing since day 1?

January 1, 2013 | 06:02 PM - Posted by Rory (not verified)

Maybe Apple has been like that for so long nobody expected them to have an open system, unlike Microsoft who I guess has been, not so much more caring, but not caring at all. If Microsoft had locked down there systems from the start I don't think anyone would have expected to be able to run other things on the chip.

January 2, 2013 | 01:18 PM - Posted by Scott Michaud

MS takes the flak because those people chose Microsoft as the alternative to Apple's terrible terrible ideas for art platforms.

Also, more and more people are starting to get ticked off with Apple.

January 1, 2013 | 06:07 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Apple does not do the same! Apple only does this on the hardware that Apple brands! Microsoft is doing this to
third party OEMs and the people who buy PCs. Apple only has a closed ecosystem on the products that they sale, Microsoft wants control of third party hardware, and it wants the users of third party hardware chained to Microsoft's closed ecosystem! There is a difference, do not be fooled by the Microsoft Spinions!

January 2, 2013 | 08:41 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

No, No, No. Apple doesnt allow 3rd party products (except accessories), so your comment is moot. Or can you tell me where I can buy (legally mind you) a 3rd party branded iPad, iPod, iMac, Macbook, or desktop product?

January 2, 2013 | 09:12 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

The article is not about Accessories, it is about the right to install a third party OS on third party hardware (PCs),
so your attempt at digressing the TRUTH that APPLE only has a CLOSED OS ECOSYSTEM (LEGALLY) on hardware that APPLE sales, while Microsoft (M$) wants to, and By their actions (Foot Dragging)with the LINUX secure boot signed bootloader, are illegally trying to monopolise the OS market on THIRD PARTY PC HARDWARE OSs!!!

January 4, 2013 | 08:15 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

And I wasnt talking about accessories if you actually read what I said, other than my exception for accessories. I asked where can I buy a 3rd party made Apple Desktop, Laptop, or tablet from...answer is...YOU CANT. Your point is still irrelevant!

January 1, 2013 | 06:22 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Microsoft should be legally restricted from doing this on any Third Party Hardware, Microsoft's attempt at doing this is a textbook monopolistic attempt to control and corner the OS market on hardware that Microsoft does not manufacture! The attorney general of the US is asleep at the wheel!

January 1, 2013 | 08:40 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

and he was still sleeping while google ran crazy as well.

January 2, 2013 | 09:40 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Yes! Yes! BUT GOOGLE, is not trying to shove its closed ecosystem down Third Party PC owners throats! Indeed! The attorney general of the US IS in a state of deep slumber, and needs to be SHOUTED back to consciousness on the ANTITRUST violations in the OS market, Microsoft is using, ilegally, Computer Security as a Method for cornering The OS market on Third Party PC Hardware! Control of the Secure Boot apparatus and its assoicated technology should be removed from Microsoft's influnce and placed with a impartial Governing BODY! Third Party PC hardware should be made legally free of any illegal influence By an OS monopoly! (NO forced OS Required on new or existing (PC) hardware, be it an OS version by the same company, or an OS by that company over all other OSs by different companys or Groups!!!)

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote><p><br>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.