3 ms·

This is precisely why we can't allow platform-owners to be the arbiters of what software is allowed to run on our devices. Any software signing that is deemed t

This is precisely why we can't allow platform-owners to be the arbiters of what software is allowed to run on our devices. Any software signing that is deemed to be crucial for ensuring grandma-safety needs to be delegated to independent third parties without perverse incentives. This is what the Digital Markets Act is supposed to protect developers against. Have there been any news regarding EU's investigation into Apple? Last I remember they were still reviewing their signing & fee-collection scheme.

duped 7mo ago
There is nothing stopping you from using third party certificates to sign Windows binaries. It's just expensive. You don't even need a MS toolchain or CLI tool for it.
- dns_snek 7mo ago
  > “Users who have enabled system encryption with VeraCrypt may face boot issues after July 2026 because Microsoft will revoke the [certificate authority] that was used to sign the VeraCrypt bootloader,” Idrassi said. “A new Microsoft CA must be used for bootloaders to continue working.” > Without access to the Microsoft account used for sending software updates, “I will not be able to apply the required new signature to VeraCrypt, making it impossible to boot.”
- Capricorn2481 7mo ago
  > It's just expensive So yes there is.
  - duped 7mo ago
    Having a fee that's trivial for serious software developers but too high for script kiddies shipping trash is a good thing.
    - stefs 6mo ago
      But that's also a fee that's trivial for well funded criminal malicious parties shipping harmful trash but too high for serious open source developers shipping free software.
  - Cthulhu_ 6mo ago
    Yeah but consider that if something is cheap or free (having Microsoft do it), what is the product? It's a tradeoff, pay for independence or be at the mercy of in this case Microsoft. (there is probably a third, fourth, fifth option but this is an internet comment section)
    - Capricorn2481 6mo ago
      Yeah they're awful, I'm just saying making it harder for people to put apps on your OS might actually be a bad move. But sure, they can always scrape the barrel.

duped 7mo ago

There is nothing stopping you from using third party certificates to sign Windows binaries. It's just expensive. You don't even need a MS toolchain or CLI tool for it.

dns_snek 7mo ago
> “Users who have enabled system encryption with VeraCrypt may face boot issues after July 2026 because Microsoft will revoke the [certificate authority] that was used to sign the VeraCrypt bootloader,” Idrassi said. “A new Microsoft CA must be used for bootloaders to continue working.” > Without access to the Microsoft account used for sending software updates, “I will not be able to apply the required new signature to VeraCrypt, making it impossible to boot.”
Capricorn2481 7mo ago
> It's just expensive So yes there is.
- duped 7mo ago
  Having a fee that's trivial for serious software developers but too high for script kiddies shipping trash is a good thing.
  - stefs 6mo ago
    But that's also a fee that's trivial for well funded criminal malicious parties shipping harmful trash but too high for serious open source developers shipping free software.
- Cthulhu_ 6mo ago
  Yeah but consider that if something is cheap or free (having Microsoft do it), what is the product? It's a tradeoff, pay for independence or be at the mercy of in this case Microsoft. (there is probably a third, fourth, fifth option but this is an internet comment section)
  - Capricorn2481 6mo ago
    Yeah they're awful, I'm just saying making it harder for people to put apps on your OS might actually be a bad move. But sure, they can always scrape the barrel.