Re: Release criteria proposal: except BitLocker-enabled installs from Windows dual-boot criterion bootloader requirement

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

 



Brian C. Lane wrote:
> We have reached a point where boot security is important enough

LOL!

> that Windows is now only allowing their bootloader to be used.

It is blatantly obvious that that is actually the goal, not the means.

This is clearly a vendor lock-in "feature", with "security" used as the 
excuse (just like other similar vendor lock-in "features", e.g., the iOS App 
Store monopoly).

Incidentally, the "feature" not only prevents chainloading (which can be 
worked around by using BootNext), but also disabling Restricted Boot 
("Secure" Boot) altogether (which is a much worse restriction), because 
that, too, changes the TPM PCR measurements.

But the marketing as a "security" "feature" clearly works, because there 
does not seem to be any noticeable public outrage about these absolutely 
unacceptable monopolistic restrictions.

        Kevin Kofler
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux