4 ms·

I just recently had to reinstall it a second time because my first image didn't let me past the account registration. It specifically stated that an internet co

I just recently had to reinstall it a second time because my first image didn't let me past the account registration. It specifically stated that an internet connection is required and there was no way around it. On a notebook where neither ethernet nor wlan worked out of the box btw, I had to install them manually. That wouldn't have been possible with the old install. While I had an adapter to enable networking just fine, I opted to reinstall with a cleaned image. This is really bad work, Microsoft... maybe think about why your users are looking for workarounds here. And no, I do not want secure boot either, thank you very much.

dgellow 2y ago
As far as I’m aware you can still manually disable the internet connection and get a local install: https://www.tomshardware.com/how-to/install-windows-11-without-microsoft-account https://www.tomshardware.com/how-to/install-windows-11-witho... Yes it’s a real pain and it should be way simpler to do. Microsoft makes it pretty hard to like windows…
- glimshe 2y ago
  That's how I installed Windows on one those mini PCs you can get from Amazon for $150. The trick, which required no fake account, came in the computer instructions. Additionally have in mind you can create a random account for free for each computer you buy. That's what I do for my TVs when using YouTube.
dtx1 2y ago
Whats the issue with Secure Boot? That's an actually good idea security wise.
- Am4TIfIsER0ppos 2y ago
  No it isn't. It is allowing microsoft the only authority to allow you to run software of your choice on your own hardware.
- raxxorraxor 2y ago
  Nah. While ensuring the integrity of your boot partition can be a security benefit, it isn't really the most attractive target for malware anymore. And instead most use cases are levelled against you. For example some computer games now require Windows 11 and secure boot to be enabled for remote attestation. If the mechanism becomes more pervasive, we will see more of that. That is very likely the main motivation of Microsoft here as well. And while there are enough methods for device identification and fingerprinting, I don't want my device to be cooperative here. I do not have evil maids either and the whole trusted computing stuff is badly designed, intransparent and mostly security fluff. I do understand the security benefit for enterprises and disk encryption, but I use alternatives for security. Also Microsoft defacto has control about allowed and allegedly secure distributions. Yes, you can add your own key, but that will probably be as viable as running your own CA at some point. Overall it just makes open computing more complicated and the security gain is negligible. edit: No idea why you were downvoted. Many believe trusted computing to "just" increase security. But the intentions and mechanisms behind that aren't as neutral as some would like you to believe. There are also other fights like AMD Pluton, which really lowers the desirability of AMD hardware for me. I though they could have been an alternative for Intel, which is fairly needed. But their developments aren't attractive if they invest in such technologies. I also forgot that a TPM has an endorsement key that is used as a hardware ID. It cannot be changed by the user. The whole setup is a scam and scams are a security threat. Secure boot and trusted computing should die, there are better ways to secure system integrity.
- guappa 2y ago
  If you can tell me how to put your own public key in there, without spending hours on google; I will agree that it is a good idea security wise.
vbezhenar 2y ago
There’s a way around it. It’s specifically made by MS. You invoke cmd with special shortcut and execute bat-file bundled in installer which adds one key to registry and restarts an installer. I don’t know if it’s an officially supported way, but given the fact that MS put all the necessary scripts and implemented it, it can’t be a coincidence.

dgellow 2y ago

As far as I’m aware you can still manually disable the internet connection and get a local install: https://www.tomshardware.com/how-to/install-windows-11-without-microsoft-account https://www.tomshardware.com/how-to/install-windows-11-witho... Yes it’s a real pain and it should be way simpler to do. Microsoft makes it pretty hard to like windows…

glimshe 2y ago
That's how I installed Windows on one those mini PCs you can get from Amazon for $150. The trick, which required no fake account, came in the computer instructions. Additionally have in mind you can create a random account for free for each computer you buy. That's what I do for my TVs when using YouTube.

dtx1 2y ago

Whats the issue with Secure Boot? That's an actually good idea security wise.

Am4TIfIsER0ppos 2y ago
No it isn't. It is allowing microsoft the only authority to allow you to run software of your choice on your own hardware.
raxxorraxor 2y ago
Nah. While ensuring the integrity of your boot partition can be a security benefit, it isn't really the most attractive target for malware anymore. And instead most use cases are levelled against you. For example some computer games now require Windows 11 and secure boot to be enabled for remote attestation. If the mechanism becomes more pervasive, we will see more of that. That is very likely the main motivation of Microsoft here as well. And while there are enough methods for device identification and fingerprinting, I don't want my device to be cooperative here. I do not have evil maids either and the whole trusted computing stuff is badly designed, intransparent and mostly security fluff. I do understand the security benefit for enterprises and disk encryption, but I use alternatives for security. Also Microsoft defacto has control about allowed and allegedly secure distributions. Yes, you can add your own key, but that will probably be as viable as running your own CA at some point. Overall it just makes open computing more complicated and the security gain is negligible. edit: No idea why you were downvoted. Many believe trusted computing to "just" increase security. But the intentions and mechanisms behind that aren't as neutral as some would like you to believe. There are also other fights like AMD Pluton, which really lowers the desirability of AMD hardware for me. I though they could have been an alternative for Intel, which is fairly needed. But their developments aren't attractive if they invest in such technologies. I also forgot that a TPM has an endorsement key that is used as a hardware ID. It cannot be changed by the user. The whole setup is a scam and scams are a security threat. Secure boot and trusted computing should die, there are better ways to secure system integrity.
guappa 2y ago
If you can tell me how to put your own public key in there, without spending hours on google; I will agree that it is a good idea security wise.

vbezhenar 2y ago

There’s a way around it. It’s specifically made by MS. You invoke cmd with special shortcut and execute bat-file bundled in installer which adds one key to registry and restarts an installer. I don’t know if it’s an officially supported way, but given the fact that MS put all the necessary scripts and implemented it, it can’t be a coincidence.