4 ms·

I still don't understand why this even needed to be fixed. Finding a way to circumvent UEFI DRM seems to be a good thing.

by ginko 6y ago

Wowfunhappy 6y ago
Secure boot can usually be turned off if its unwanted. I agree its not necessary on every device—but if it is enabled, the OS should assume the user wants security at that level of the chain. It certainly shouldn't just circumvent it as a matter of course.
- cesarb 6y ago
  > Secure boot can usually be turned off if its unwanted. Emphasis mine. The main objection to secure boot is that, some time in the future, it will be mandatory; that already is the case for Windows devices with ARM CPUs (https://www.softwarefreedom.org/blog/2012/jan/12/microsoft-confirms-UEFI-fears-locks-down-ARM/ https://www.softwarefreedom.org/blog/2012/jan/12/microsoft-c...).
  - my123 6y ago
    Hello, Windows Client (laptops/tablets/...) devices with 64-bit Arm CPUs have Secure Boot unlockable. That article applied to Windows RT and Windows Phone, which were earlier projects.
    - Lammy 6y ago
      My objection to Secure Boot is right in the name. What's it designed to be secure from? From me, the user.
      - Wowfunhappy 6y ago
        But it's not, it's meant to be secure from rootkits! A lot of secure boot implementations let you add your own keys. Some don't, and that's bad, but it's not the fault of secure boot!
        Lammy 6y ago
        Number of rootkits Secure Boot has saved me from: zero Number of times Secure Boot has locked out a legitimate user: too many The only reason everyone used the Fedora key was because the alternative was registering with Microsoft, paying $99, and hoping for approval. Microsoft are as much a gatekeeper in this as they've always been, and the whole framing of the news around this feels like an attempt to discredit those who would go around the gatekeeper: https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/17542.html https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/17542.html
        Wowfunhappy 6y ago
        Where are you even buying computers that make secure boot mandatory? I know they exist but I’ve never run into them. Did you consider just getting a different model?
        Lammy 6y ago
        Please don't victim-blame :)
    - kasabali 6y ago
      no guarantee they'll be unlockable in later projects

I still don't understand why this even needed to be fixed. Finding a way to circumvent UEFI DRM seems to be a good thing.

by ginko 6y ago

I still don't understand why this even needed to be fixed. Finding a way to circumvent UEFI DRM seems to be a good thing.

Wowfunhappy 6y ago

Secure boot can usually be turned off if its unwanted. I agree its not necessary on every device—but if it is enabled, the OS should assume the user wants security at that level of the chain. It certainly shouldn't just circumvent it as a matter of course.

cesarb 6y ago
> Secure boot can usually be turned off if its unwanted. Emphasis mine. The main objection to secure boot is that, some time in the future, it will be mandatory; that already is the case for Windows devices with ARM CPUs (https://www.softwarefreedom.org/blog/2012/jan/12/microsoft-confirms-UEFI-fears-locks-down-ARM/ https://www.softwarefreedom.org/blog/2012/jan/12/microsoft-c...).
- my123 6y ago
  Hello, Windows Client (laptops/tablets/...) devices with 64-bit Arm CPUs have Secure Boot unlockable. That article applied to Windows RT and Windows Phone, which were earlier projects.
  - Lammy 6y ago
    My objection to Secure Boot is right in the name. What's it designed to be secure from? From me, the user.
    - Wowfunhappy 6y ago
      But it's not, it's meant to be secure from rootkits! A lot of secure boot implementations let you add your own keys. Some don't, and that's bad, but it's not the fault of secure boot!
      - Lammy 6y ago
        Number of rootkits Secure Boot has saved me from: zero Number of times Secure Boot has locked out a legitimate user: too many The only reason everyone used the Fedora key was because the alternative was registering with Microsoft, paying $99, and hoping for approval. Microsoft are as much a gatekeeper in this as they've always been, and the whole framing of the news around this feels like an attempt to discredit those who would go around the gatekeeper: https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/17542.html https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/17542.html
        Wowfunhappy 6y ago
        Where are you even buying computers that make secure boot mandatory? I know they exist but I’ve never run into them. Did you consider just getting a different model?
        Lammy 6y ago
        Please don't victim-blame :)
  - kasabali 6y ago
    no guarantee they'll be unlockable in later projects