>When secure boot started to go mainstream there was a lot of FUD that it was really just a mechanism to lock out alternative OSes. It wasn't just FUD. Microso

>When secure boot started to go mainstream there was a lot of FUD that it was really just a mechanism to lock out alternative OSes. It wasn't just FUD. Microsoft has changed their tune on this over the years, but it used to be that their certification requirements mandated that users could not disable secure boot on ARM devices: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/01/microsoft-mandating-secure-boot-on-arm-making-linux-installs-difficult/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/01/micro... If that were still their policy today, it would make projects like this nearly impossible.