On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 10:28:54 +0800, Timothy Sipples wrote:
>
>(a) The Unified Extensible Firmware Interface (UEFI). UEFI features
>something called "Secure Boot." To summarize, even open source operating
>systems must be cryptographically signed with an unrevoked key in order to
>boot. Starting with Windows 10, Microsoft has "persuaded" the industry
>(OEMs) to make Secure Boot mandatory. This is quite controversial, it's
>fair to say. You don't have to "jailbreak" a mainframe just because you
>want/need to run a modified Linux kernel in an emergency, for example --
>and it's probably not even possible to "jailbreak" Secure Boot.
>
So where does this leave Linux for the x86 platform?  Is Microsoft trying
to kill Linux?  The FTC should have much to say about that, perhaps
prodded by such as Google.

Of course, I understand Google makes its own hardware (or contracts
it to spec).  And any OEMs could go it alone; not sign the Secure Boot
agreement.  But they'd be abandoning the Windows market, perhaps
not economically viable.  And could Microsoft leverage DHS/DMCA to
block even that?

Who maintains the key registry?  (I have a plausible guess.)  Will
OSF be able to afford (a) key(s)?

-- gil

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to