FSF Campaigns Against Windows 8's Secure Boot

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]xenol[/nom]Apple does this already. It's a combination of requiring UEFI (which most PCs don't have) and Intel's TPM chip. I think.[/citation]

U can install any OS you want on a Mac.

Not being able to install Mac OS on non-Apple hardware is a different thing.
 
Here's the thing, why don't they wait until these new SecureBoot systems are in place, then modify the next version of the distro to be compliant with the required standards?

Wringing your hands that you are unable to install a 5 year old version of Ubuntu on a cutting edge bit of secure hardware is a bit of a stretch isn't it? Work with the industry, not against it.
 
[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]Why should a commercial organisation, such as a motherboard vendor, go out of their way to support an OS that does nothing to provide any capital input?This is not Linux vs Windows.When Linux pays money into the IT industry it can ask for whatever it wants, until then it can't complain because it has had a free ride so far.[/citation]

That's right. Microsoft pays Intel, nVidia, AMD and others to make sure everything is compatible, and that makes sense. So does Apple. Linux doesn't, hence half-assed support for all the new hardware.

I wonder, are all these hours of "open source enthusiasts" coding their own drivers instead of using the manufacturer's ones worth it? :lol:

[citation][nom]nordlead[/nom]I re-purpose discarded computers and laptops (mostly from DELL) for people who can't afford new PCs, but need a word processor and an internet connection. In 10 years I'll be doing it with i7's and whatever else is bleeding edge now. I am savvy enough to not buy prebuilt but I still use them.EDIT: I'll also say that as much as I love Windows, Microsoft needs to fix the problem of malicious code running in Windows before they fix a problem that doesn't even exist.[/citation]

As much as I think your work benefits the people, I'm sorry to say, but the IT industry doesn't care where modern laptops will end up in ten years.
 
[citation][nom]de5_roy[/nom]this very uncool. microsoft(and manufacturers) should let users choose which os to boot from. this aint secure boot. this is no linux on this pc cuz i r ballmer boot.if apple does this already with their pcs then they should sue microsoft for patent infringement and get it disabled/removed, in which case linux/fsf wins. on the other hand, apple might be happy since this will make building hackintosh with a windows 8.0 pc harder.[/citation]

They've (MS) has already said that they're not going to limit boot to ONLY Windows, only that you need a trusted installation of Linux (which they can do easily)

And Apple is NOT happy with hakintoshes. They want OSX run only on Apple hardware. They're already limiting what can be installed on their boxes; and they only want their software installed on their boxes.
 
[citation][nom]socalboomer[/nom]They've (MS) has already said that they're not going to limit boot to ONLY Windows, only that you need a trusted installation of Linux (which they can do easily) And Apple is NOT happy with hakintoshes. They want OSX run only on Apple hardware. They're already limiting what can be installed on their boxes; and they only want their software installed on their boxes.[/citation]

Of course Apple is unhappy. And that's great.
 
[citation][nom]mykem[/nom]Since the motherboard manufacturers are responsible for the BIOS implementation, it is up to them as to whether to allow a BIOS setting that enables/disables the secure boot service. This is where the Linux folks and FSF take issue.The reality is that no motherboard manufacturer in their right mind would leave out the option to disable secure boot, as this would restrict the computer to Windows 8. No previous version of Windows, no versions of Linux... nothing else could be used on that computer. The customer outcry would be deafening. [/citation]

You are absolutely right that it is up to the motherboard manufacturers to provide a mechanism to disable it. However, I do not share your optimism that there would be a huge outcry that would make the manufacturers take notice if they did not provide a way of disabling it. Right now if you try to report BIOS issues for example to most consumer motherboard manufacturers or OEMS the answer all to many times is "it works fine in windows and that is what we support". You can also see how well the manufacturers have responded to items like providing a mechanism to utilize disable items like Optimus laptops so that something other then Windows can use the discreet GPU.
 
at shafe88

why should hardware vendors decide what we do with hardware we bought? answer that one.
 


No. GRUB is not "in Windows", it is a boot loader and it is stored in the MBR. Windows will install its own bootloader and overwrite the existing one. That's happening since ever and it's fine. Scares off stupid switchers who are too clueless even for Windows, let alone Linux, and is not a trouble for a power user (boot Live CD - assume root privileges - reinstall GRUB - update GRUB - problem solved; add shiny colours and a custom background to GRUB while you're at it).
 
at shafe88

why should hardware vendors decide what we do with hardware we bought? answer that one.
Click to expand...

Because THEY get to deal with malware that overwrites BIOS and RMA your hardware damaged by non-authorised drivers. That's why Linux WILL be allowed, but only secure distros.
 
Search for "Windows OEM SLP SLIC" and you'll understand that this is a DRM issue, not a malware or anti-Linux ploy (although they realize that it's a nice side-effect).
 
[citation][nom]amk-aka-phantom[/nom]No. GRUB is not "in Windows", it is a boot loader and it is stored in the MBR. Windows will install its own bootloader and overwrite the existing one. That's happening since ever and it's fine. Scares off stupid switchers who are too clueless even for Windows, let alone Linux, and is not a trouble for a power user (boot Live CD - assume root privileges - reinstall GRUB - update GRUB - problem solved; add shiny colours and a custom background to GRUB while you're at it).[/citation]

Well I've installed grub many times but if you want to add an option for booting into win 8 to GRUB it's not that straight forward.
 
Even if manufacturers remove this ability, won't a BIOS mod fix this? Can't a virus even update the BIOS? I mean the only way I would see this being semi bullet-proof is if it required live connectivity to their OTP (One Time Pad) server prior to boot and that code would have to be burned in ROM. Am I missing something?
 
If anyone wants Secure Boot on a current PC, they can just make it boot from CD - so it won't make computers significantly more secure. TXT also works.
 
Windows 8 sounds like a great OS with good spec requirements. Easy to avoid that though if you have two hardrives and your BIOS let's you boot from your choice, the other system will know nothing about the others boot sequences. As always there are secrets for doing things, and u know how we like to keep our secrets. Human nature, although we are almost 1/3 machine :)
 
If it protects me, the user, then I'm all for it. One of my biggest issues with windows is all the hidden little things 3rd party vendors can slip in without my permission. Today when an application is installed, it gets free trusted access to my entire machine and this should be stopped.
 
[citation][nom]jacekring[/nom]Stop confusing Linux users with Apple users. Linux users are smart enough to turn off this feature to install an alternate OS. Apple users have difficulty finding the power button to turn on their iCrap.[/citation]
Apparently the software community closely associated with Linux seems to think they may not be smart enough as it is they who are crying.

Seriously, all I have ever heard is how "secure" Linux us suppose to be, yet they are complaining about manufacturers taking security to the next level. Yes, there is potential for there to be misuse of this, but as long as the consumers stay on top of it, I doubt it will be abused. As someone else pointed out, MS was almost broken up over just a browser being integrated, this could be much worse if people's paranoia were to happen and they would be broken up. Microsoft isn't going to risk that.
 
Wait to see what actually happens, then decide whether or not to open your mouth FSF. I highly doubt Microsoft has any such plans, nor do any of the hardware manufacturers. You needing press time is all I see here.
 
[citation][nom]beavisand[/nom]at shafe88why should hardware vendors decide what we do with hardware we bought? answer that one.[/citation]
Hardware vendors would not decide what we do with our hardware, and computer manufactures like dell and hp cannot decide what we can do with the hardware we buy, if someone decides to use their hard drive as a paper weight dell or hp can't tell them they can't. If some one buys a graphics card dell and hp can't tell them what to do with it, but they can decide weather or not they can use in their computer.
 
[citation][nom]clonazepam[/nom]Wait to see what actually happens, then decide whether or not to open your mouth FSF. I highly doubt Microsoft has any such plans, nor do any of the hardware manufacturers. You needing press time is all I see here.[/citation]

Touche. They're just trying to attract attention. I, for one, have never even heard of "FSF" until today and I work with Linux every day 😀
 
[citation][nom]deanjo[/nom]You are absolutely right that it is up to the motherboard manufacturers to provide a mechanism to disable it. However, I do not share your optimism that there would be a huge outcry that would make the manufacturers take notice if they did not provide a way of disabling it. Right now if you try to report BIOS issues for example to most consumer motherboard manufacturers or OEMS the answer all to many times is "it works fine in windows and that is what we support". You can also see how well the manufacturers have responded to items like providing a mechanism to utilize disable items like Optimus laptops so that something other then Windows can use the discreet GPU.[/citation]


Even so, with razor thin margins, there aren't any manufacturers I can think of that would risk alienating their user base by limiting their motherboards to just Windows 8.

There is no marketing scenario I can think of that would justify shuttering out your customer base. By locking in Windows 8, you've just eliminated the entire Enterprise market, which is notorious for taking years to adopt a new OS. You're also locking out the majority of the server market (running Linux), and I just can't see anyone doing that and hoping to turn a profit, especially with the current economy. Also, if you take a look at your current computer's BIOS, I can just about guarantee that there are settings in there that you or I don't even know what they're for. Yet, the manufacturers took the effort to put them in there for completeness and for those who know what they're doing.

I still think this is really a non-issue.
 
[citation][nom]socalboomer[/nom]And Apple is NOT happy with hakintoshes. They want OSX run only on Apple hardware. They're already limiting what can be installed on their boxes; and they only want their software installed on their boxes.[/citation]

Apple doesn't stop you from installing whatever you want on a Macintosh. What makes u think otherwise?
 
[citation][nom]socalboomer[/nom]Apple is NOT happy with hakintoshes. They want OSX run only on Apple hardware. They're already limiting what can be installed on their boxes; and they only want their software installed on their boxes.[/citation]
Actually it's the other way round, they destroyed Psystar for trying to install OSX on non-Apple hardware.
[citation][nom]FloKid[/nom]Windows 8 sounds like a great OS with good spec requirements. Easy to avoid that though if you have two hardrives and your BIOS let's you boot from your choice[/citation]
Totally agree, have Windows on one hard drive, Linux installed on another, it's not like it is difficult.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom