News Windows 7 Reportedly Gets Secure Boot in Last Dying Gasp

[Admin]

As Microsoft stop issuing security ups for Windows 7, it is reportedly offering Secure Boot and native UEFI.

Windows 7 Reportedly Gets Secure Boot in Last Dying Gasp : Read more

 

[Shawn Eary]

Please tell me this isn't actually happening. I can't afford to upgrade my home computer to Windows 11 because of a trivial TPM requirement. Contrary to popular belief, I'm pretty sure TPMs do very little to actually increase system security. I really don't think secure boot is all of what it's hyped up to be and it's a major hassle to deal with.

 

[TechieTwo]

"Secure boot" of any Windows OS would be an oxymoron.

 

[RichardtST]

" it's probably time to update to Windows 10 or 11, for safety's sake." - Except that this simply is not true. As we all know, software complexity and vulnerabilities continue to grow unabated. You are far safer using an antique (or off the beaten path) OS that the attackers won't even think to bother with, than you are using the latest and greatest Windows or Linux. And it's only a matter of time until we all get to see the fallacy of having perfectly identical versions on everything. It means, of course, that I only have to write ONE virus to pwn the whole lot. If you want to be safe... be different!

 

[USAFRet]

Please tell me this isn't actually happening. I can't afford to upgrade my home computer to Windows 11 because of a trivial TPM requirement. Contrary to popular belief, I'm pretty sure TPMs do very little to actually increase system security. I really don't think secure boot is all of what it's hyped up to be and it's a major hassle to deal with.

Why not Win 10?

The end date of 7 has been known for loooong time.

 

[TechieTwo]

Just say: "NO" to Windows updates.

 

[ezst036]

Please tell me this isn't actually happening. I can't afford to upgrade my home computer to Windows 11 because of a trivial TPM requirement. Contrary to popular belief, I'm pretty sure TPMs do very little to actually increase system security. I really don't think secure boot is all of what it's hyped up to be and it's a major hassle to deal with.

Not enough people are willing to ditch Windows and install Linux after such pushy measures as this, so, unfortunately, it probably is real. Microsoft knows it won't face any recourse. So why wouldn't they?

FWIW, I'd be happy to work with you or anybody else to do a Linux upgrade. But I also say that knowing I won't get many takers. It irks me to say it, but Microsoft is actually correct. They can bully their customers around and the customers just keep taking it and taking it without any end. I don't get it. But I do acknowledge reality.

 

[USAFRet]

Not enough people are willing to ditch Windows and install Linux after such pushy measures as this, so, unfortunately, it probably is real. Microsoft knows it won't face any recourse. So why wouldn't they?

FWIW, I'd be happy to work with you or anybody else to do a Linux upgrade. But I also say that knowing I won't get many takers. It irks me to say it, but Microsoft is actually correct. They can bully their customers around and the customers just keep taking it and taking it without any end. I don't get it. But I do acknowledge reality.

Pushy?
Win 7 is currently 13+ years old. (Oct 2009)
The end date of support has been known for ages.
I don't think 13 years is unreasonable.

And if it will run Win 7, it will run Win 10. Which is fully supported until at least Oct 2025.
And an Upgrade to Win 10 is $0.

 

[ezst036]

Pushy?

Yep. The article doesn't mention a TPM, but I bet Shawn is right and I think pushy isn't even a strong enough word if there's a TPM requirement. You seem to forget that the old Windows 11 propaganda used to be that if you didn't want to upgrade to Win11 with its TPM requirement, you could keep using your Win7 or Win10. For end users such as Shawn Eary it's downright abusive that its now coming to this. It's not just pushy, it's abusive.

Win 7 is currently 13+ years old. (Oct 2009)

That doesn't matter that it's 13 years old, not when users have a perfectly working copy that now may get artificially broken by the parent company who did this intentionally, and arguably maliciously.

 

[blppt]

Isn't there a way to bypass the TPM requirement anyways?

 

[Exploding PSU]

Allow me to pour one out, the last one, for the king. RIP Windows 7

 

[hotaru.hino]

You are far safer using an antique (or off the beaten path) OS that the attackers won't even think to bother with, than you are using the latest and greatest Windows or Linux.

Okay, let me use Windows 98. Oh look, it happily autoplays anything I plug into it by default and it has no concept of user permissions so applications can run anything without me noticing and wreck havoc on the system. An OS with no security permissions and is very permissive by default is more secure! 🙃

Also before you pull out "but muh LTSB style builds," they ignore feature updates, which aren't necessarily a security problem, they just create problems with the user applications running correctly. They still get the latest security updates.

 

[Math Geek]

I don't think this is a secure boot requirement but rather offering it as an option now with win 7.

from the article...
"Neowin first saw the feature on the Chinese-language CSDN forums. Some people have had some issues enabling UEFI and Secure Boot, "

does not sound like an added requirement to run win 7.

Believe me I get the ms hate, I'm with you there. But at least hate them for the right reason. Lol

 

[ohio_buckeye]

Yep. The article doesn't mention a TPM, but I bet Shawn is right and I think pushy isn't even a strong enough word if there's a TPM requirement. You seem to forget that the old Windows 11 propaganda used to be that if you didn't want to upgrade to Win11 with its TPM requirement, you could keep using your Win7 or Win10. For end users such as Shawn Eary it's downright abusive that its now coming to this. It's not just pushy, it's abusive.


That doesn't matter that it's 13 years old, not when users have a perfectly working copy that now may get artificially broken by the parent company who did this intentionally, and arguably maliciously.

13 years and you are complaining? It’s beyond time to update. You can’t expect them to support an OS for 20 years.

 

[hotaru.hino]

A lot of the detractors make me feel that they believe that software developers have no rights to do what they want with the software they develop. They must cater to the whims of their users, no matter how big or small they are compared to the number of users as a whole.

If you don't like how Microsoft does things, there are perfectly viable alternatives: Linux or FreeBSD. Nobody's holding a gun to your head and telling you that you must use Windows. And if you go "but there's something I do that only works on Windows!" well too bad. Developers aren't free. Either hand Microsoft a fat wad of cash to do what you want or build your own.

 

[randyh121]

Isn't there a way to bypass the TPM requirement anyways?

Yes its very easy you just need to delete a single dll from the windows 11 installer

 

[JimboCA]

Please tell me this isn't actually happening. I can't afford to upgrade my home computer to Windows 11 because of a trivial TPM requirement. Contrary to popular belief, I'm pretty sure TPMs do very little to actually increase system security. I really don't think secure boot is all of what it's hyped up to be and it's a major hassle to deal with.

There are ways to disable the TPM check for Windows 11 installation. That may help unless you wish to buy a TPM module for your motherboard (if it supports it)
https://www.tomshardware.com/how-to/bypass-windows-11-tpm-requirement

 

[USAFRet]

Yep. The article doesn't mention a TPM, but I bet Shawn is right and I think pushy isn't even a strong enough word if there's a TPM requirement. You seem to forget that the old Windows 11 propaganda used to be that if you didn't want to upgrade to Win11 with its TPM requirement, you could keep using your Win7 or Win10. For end users such as Shawn Eary it's downright abusive that its now coming to this. It's not just pushy, it's abusive.


That doesn't matter that it's 13 years old, not when users have a perfectly working copy that now may get artificially broken by the parent company who did this intentionally, and arguably maliciously.

This is not a requirement to have TPM to run Win 7.
This is an optional hotfix to enable TPM support. If you want it.

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us...-2008-r2-8ef7d943-995e-ee23-0c54-06600e368e1c

 

[Bogus Juan]

13 years and you are complaining? It’s beyond time to update. You can’t expect them to support an OS for 20 years.

No but they could open source their deprecated software so people could maintain on their own time/expense if desired.

 

[hotaru.hino]

No but they could open source their deprecated software so people could maintain on their own time/expense if desired.

Which would require a huge amount of time and money to understand how the source code works. Especially since Microsoft isn't going to support them if they have any questions about it.

If whatever system running Windows 7 (or really any OS) was mission critical and you didn't have a obsolescence plan in place, that's kind of your fault.

 

[Grobe]

Nobody's holding a gun to your head and telling you that you must use Windows.

Because that is bad for business and will backfire. Or . . . - Could they actually get away with that?

 

[ohio_buckeye]

Why would they open it? In many ways the newer versions have a lot of elements of windows 7. If you are them you don’t want to create a competitor and lose money.

 

[outsider2k21]

Please tell me this isn't actually happening. I can't afford to upgrade my home computer to Windows 11 because of a trivial TPM requirement. Contrary to popular belief, I'm pretty sure TPMs do very little to actually increase system security. I really don't think secure boot is all of what it's hyped up to be and it's a major hassle to deal with.

I have installed windows 11 on some really old hardware such as Phenom FX 8150 & asus sabertooth 990fx, i7 6900k & Asus X99 pro, Intel NUC6i5SYK and my new R9 7950X & Asus X670E hero with TPM disabled. I just download ISO and create bootable usb drive with Rufus. (think you can diable some windows 11 function with rufus.)

 

[USAFRet]

I have installed windows 11 on some really old hardware such as Phenom FX 8150 & asus sabertooth 990fx, i7 6900k & Asus X99 pro, Intel NUC6i5SYK and my new R9 7950X & Asus X670E hero with TPM disabled. I just download ISO and create bootable usb drive with Rufus. (think you can diable some windows 11 function with rufus.)

There is no need to forcefeed Win 11 on his system.

1. This TPM addition to WIn 7 is totally optional.
2. The existing Win 7 does not stop working at the end of January. Just that it will not get future updates.
3. That system would easily update to Win 10 for free.

 

[DavidLejdar]

Windows 7... pffft. Like I'd ever upgrade from MS-DOS based Windows 95...

Joking of course. In general, I found the offer by MS quite nice, to be able to upgrade (home edition) to Win10 for free. And I did that on a rig with DDR3, which is now some 10 years old, and Win10 worked fine on it as recently as 3 months ago (when I got me a new rig, and now with Win11), with the minimum requirements for Win10 quite similar to Win7 and 8.

So, unless someone is simply overwhelmed with the upgrade process, I don't really understand why one wouldn't want to upgrade at least to Win10.

Please tell me this isn't actually happening. I can't afford to upgrade my home computer to Windows 11 because of a trivial TPM requirement. Contrary to popular belief, I'm pretty sure TPMs do very little to actually increase system security. I really don't think secure boot is all of what it's hyped up to be and it's a major hassle to deal with.

TPM-modules exist, in some cases for less than $20. Whether the manufacturer of your MB offers a TPM-module for it, that is a question, which depends on what MB you actually have.

As for newer MBs and the minimum requirement for Win11, the cheapest combo with a CPU can be had for less than $100 (plus a bit for DDR4 RAM). That's still money of course, but just to be clear what the price tag is, in case there is a worry that it may take at least $500 worth of hardware just to be able to run Win11.

And as was mentioned, Win10 is an option as well.