4 ms·
The problem is who uses it. A packet manager is installed by the user of the system. It's protecting against attackers elsewhere on the internet tricking the u
by vilhelm_s 10y ago
The problem is who uses it.
A packet manager is installed by the user of the system. It's protecting against attackers elsewhere on the internet tricking the user into installing malware. The "secure boot" is installed by the manufacturer before selling the computer. It's "protecting" the computer against running the software that the user wants. One of them gives users more control over what programs they run, the other gives them less.
- boomboomsubban 10y agoIt's protecting users from running unsigned operating systems on their computer, protecting the user from a malicious operating system having full access to their computer. You're arguing against the implementation, which both the author and I agree is flawed, where hardware manufacturers are the only ones regularly controlling keys.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- MertsA 10y agoThat just isn't true, especially on x86. I can and have loaded my own keys and made secure boot validate against my keys to force it to only run what I wanted it to. The standard actually mandates this so it's pretty disingenuous to state that secure boot on a computer prevents the user from running whatever software they want to. The user is always free to control secureboot except for on windows phones, you might have a point about it being a bad thing for mobile.
- mindslight 10y agoPlease read my above comments more carefully. Secure boot on x86 (amd64) is deliberately crippled to avoid anti-trust scrutiny.
- MertsA 10y agoSo they deliberately made it so that the end user has control over their own computer to avoid looking evil! How dastardly of them. Either way, right now Secure Boot gives me more control over what runs on my computer, that's a fact.