4 ms·
Linux has fallen behind in boot security and anti-tampering because all of the solutions in this area are proprietary and at least initially released under NDA.
by R0b0t1 4y ago
Linux has fallen behind in boot security and anti-tampering because all of the solutions in this area are proprietary and at least initially released under NDA. You're using the effects of this very program to justify itself.
- Avamander 4y agoFirstly, it wasn't a justification, it was a description of the current state. Secondly, no, they aren't all proprietary. If we start from the bottom then Secure Boot is neither proprietary or NDA'd. There are even open-source implementations of Secure Boot. We simply have a significant amount of feet-dragging and misconceptions out there, pointlessly making using just SB alone difficult and not the default, you can see a bunch of it in this thread as well. I won't even get into measured boot to auto-unlock FDE/LUKS or god forbid LIM, those aren't difficult because of some supposedly NDA'd specifications. Damn, enabling IOMMU isn't that difficult either. Nobody else should be blamed for the poor state of those. Lastly, some standard being initially released under NDA or being proprietary (which ones do you actually have in mind?) is a terrible justification to not improve things. Or find alternatives just as good.
- drekipus 4y ago> some standard being initially released under NDA or being proprietary (which ones do you actually have in mind?) is a terrible justification to not improve things. Or find alternatives just as good. I think them being NDA / proprietary is a reason we can't improve things, not a justification for it.