Re: Red Hat Will Pay Microsoft To Get Past UEFI Restrictions

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 06/04/2012 03:22 AM, J.Witvliet@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of JD
Sent: Monday, June 04, 2012 11:40 AM
To: Community support for Fedora users
Subject: Re: Red Hat Will Pay Microsoft To Get Past UEFI Restrictions

On 06/04/2012 01:47 AM, Thibault Nélis wrote:
.

In my opinion, a better question would be "When will alternative
organizations to Microsoft will appear to offer the same services?",
and with that one I'd actually worry they might never come, even
though we need them.

So, if all the linux distros put their "heads" together and create a single
Linux signature authority, which will serve all the distros, and be funded
largely by the industry (which sell linux servers - such as IBM, among
others),
and other for-money linux distros, such as Red Hat; then this will go a long
way towards making linux totally independent of MS as far as key signatures
are concerned.
-----Original Message-----

Excuse me if I'm misunderstanding,
But somehow it looks to me that we are forced in a direction we should not be heading to.

Wasn't the whole idea behind this uefi-restrictions, to:
a) improve Microsoft security record (fighting malware, rogue-drivers, worms, ...)
b) Fighting illegal versions of Windows.

If you -on those uefi-systems- can only boot a legitimate (contradiction in terminis) version of windows?
Big deal!
As long as you still can boot something else.... (I mean NON-microsoft)
It should only means that their marketshare will be smaller (loss of "cloned" versions of W8/W9/Wx)

Just hope that "official" versions of W8, do not require such uefi-structure beneath them, otherwise you have a problem with vmware/kvm/xen.

Please correct me if I'm wrong...

Hans

I lost you guy!
I mean I do not understand how the creation of a single linux distro
signature authority for all linuxes, undermines whatever MS does to secure it's OS.
Are the two necessarily mutually exclusive (i.e. they cannot both be used on
dual or milti-boot systems?
--
users mailing list
users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org


[Index of Archives]     [Older Fedora Users]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [EPEL Announce]     [EPEL Devel]     [Fedora Magazine]     [Fedora Summer Coding]     [Fedora Laptop]     [Fedora Cloud]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Education]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Scitech]     [Fedora Robotics]     [Fedora Infrastructure]     [Fedora Websites]     [Anaconda Devel]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora Fonts]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Management Tools]     [Fedora Mentors]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora R Devel]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kickstart]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Fedora Legal]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora OCaml]     [Coolkey]     [Virtualization Tools]     [ET Management Tools]     [Yum Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Gnome Users]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [Fedora Sparc]     [Libvirt Users]     [Fedora ARM]

  Powered by Linux