On 07/07/2012 09:05 AM, Fernando Cassia wrote:
On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 9:44 AM, Rahul Sundaram <metherid@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On x86 systems, the ability to disable secure boot is mandated by
Microsoft and needed to debug Microsoft drivers and since all the
hardware manufacturers want to comply to this specification, you can be
rest assured they will provide this functionality and once you disable
secure boot (instructions for this will likely be in a Fedora wiki
page
Yes, but notice the evil in Microsoft´s wording. Who wants to disable
"SECURE" booting? Secure ´feels good´. Lack of ´secure´ does not. It´s
like asking "do you want to disable secure landing"? on an airplane.
;)
Of course 99.9% of the people will think "why do I have to disable
SECURE boot to run this? I don´t want my system to have INSECURE
booting... please give me secure! in fact, I´d like extra secure if
possible" ;). -even if they don´t know what secure booting means to
begin with- ;)
Thus, for starters, RedHat´s decision to pay for a signing key is the
practical approach, so users will be able to boot Fedora without
tweaking their BIOS/CMOS settings.
But what I think could be challenged with antitrust regulators is
Microsoft CHARGING for it. To keep it a level playing field MSFT
should issue free keys to any OS development firm that asks for one,
whether commercial or open source.
FC
Microsoft could always argue that their "technology" is proprietary and
therefore not subject to the monopoly laws and anti-trust rules that
exist.....I'm almost certain M$ has done their homework this time
around, and that they'll continue to do all in their power to make it
harder for anyone else to circumvent their products!
EGO II
--
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
