LinuxQuestions.org
Support LQ: Use code LQ3 and save $3 on Domain Registration
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 12-30-2012, 03:53 AM   #1
H_TeXMeX_H
Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269
The Free Software Foundation Campaigning to Stop UEFI SecureBoot


Read the article:
http://paritynews.com/software/item/...efi-secureboot
Sign here if you agree:
http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-...boot/statement
 
Old 12-30-2012, 07:05 AM   #2
brianL
LQ 5k Club
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Oldham, Lancs, England
Distribution: Slackware & Slackware64 14.1
Posts: 6,902
Blog Entries: 51

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Signed it a while ago.
 
Old 12-30-2012, 06:29 PM   #3
NyteOwl
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2008
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Distribution: Slackware, OpenBSD, others periodically
Posts: 512

Rep: Reputation: 138Reputation: 138
The problem isn't with secure boot per se, but in how it may be implemented.
 
Old 12-30-2012, 07:38 PM   #4
codergeek
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2012
Posts: 52

Rep: Reputation: 7
I signed up as well. Of course, I probably will never have an issue with secure boot because I don't use windows and I build my own PC.
 
Old 01-03-2013, 10:13 AM   #5
sundialsvcs
Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 5,263

Rep: Reputation: 1078Reputation: 1078Reputation: 1078Reputation: 1078Reputation: 1078Reputation: 1078Reputation: 1078Reputation: 1078
Personally, I think that we'll find the UEFI protocol to be flawed anyhow. In the world of classified information (so I am told ...) such requirements are handled by, among other things, the use of encrypted disk drives. And of course, ROMs cannot simply be "flashed" as they can be in consumer computers today.

UEFI is the first-generation attempt to restrict the operating-system images that a particular computer will consent to boot from, but it's still basically voluntary. In other words, the ROM executes an algorithm, then based on that result it decides whether it should or should not choose to do what, in either case, it is capable of doing.

It could be a defense of-sorts against "rootkitting," but once again I doubt that the actual scope of the "thing to be protected" is wide enough. An operating system consists of hundreds of components, and the protected entity is, again AFAIK, only the first-stage boot. To really and securely protect the thing, we would either have to have a way to individually protect the thousands of individual files, or we would resort to the use of hardware-encrypted volumes (and multiple volumes, the "system residence" volume being hardware read-only). Maybe when we've switched the world to solid-state instead of rotating metal discs we'll see that done.

... and all of that is assuming that the Android tablet and iPad tablet are not simply taking over the world so as to render everything that we now know "market obsolete." Which could well happen and be happening.
 
Old 01-03-2013, 11:13 AM   #6
H_TeXMeX_H
Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269
On ARM it is NOT voluntary, you cannot opt out there. M$'s plan was to have it mandatory on all platforms, but Intel and AMD opposed it, and so M$'s evil plan was delayed.

There are so many evil plans afoot that I cannot say them all, I don't have the motivation nor the audience to understand them. All I can say is it all fits together, the plan is elaborate and it is of the greatest evil.

Things that will happen some time in the future:
Everything will move to mobile terminals to the cloud (smartphones and tablets), and they can cut you off at any time.
All of these terminals will be locked down using Secure Boot (ARM already is).
All real computers will disappear, break (on their own or using new technology), or maybe even be confiscated because they are threats to cyber-security = cyber-terrorism / cyber-crime. Surely they will require an internet ID and you will need Secure Boot to not be considered a cyber-terrorist.
And it all fits in with the rest of the plans, they will also use arguments like PCs not being eco-friendly = using too much power.

Overall, it's all about power ... you losing it, and them gaining it. That sums it up. Yes, I'm sure you're sick of my paranoid musings, but don't worry I will stop posting them soon.
 
Old 01-03-2013, 12:47 PM   #7
DavidMcCann
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2006
Location: London
Distribution: CentOS, Salix
Posts: 2,957

Rep: Reputation: 767Reputation: 767Reputation: 767Reputation: 767Reputation: 767Reputation: 767Reputation: 767
Everything will move to smartphones and tablets? Ever tried running a spreadsheet on a smartphone, or writing a report on a tablet?

And who are these people with evil plans? And where are they? Remember there are plenty of others with a beady eye on them! The EU has come down hard on Microsoft several times, and are "keeping an eye", they say, on whether the ARM situation is acceptable. Countries like Russia and Brazil are moving to Linux on state and educational computers. Microsoft & co may be able to buy politicians in countries like the US (scuppering the Justice Department's plan to break them up), Serbia, and Pakistan, but some of us are more resistant.
 
Old 01-03-2013, 01:17 PM   #8
H_TeXMeX_H
Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269
It's true, it will be difficult to get anything done on these dinky little smartphones and tablets, but I'm sure they'll find a way to do it. I see people can text almost as fast as I can type, so I don't think there will be too much of an issue.

They are the eye, lidless, wreathed in flame. They are where no other eye can see them.
 
Old 01-03-2013, 06:37 PM   #9
sundialsvcs
Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 5,263

Rep: Reputation: 1078Reputation: 1078Reputation: 1078Reputation: 1078Reputation: 1078Reputation: 1078Reputation: 1078Reputation: 1078
Usually, the way that people get "blind-sided" by a technological change is that they are unable to visualize how a business objective could possibly be met, other than by employing the then-existing "only" way to do it. And, since the then-existing way "has 'obvious' advantages," "these aren't the 'droids you're looking for ... move along ..."

Famously, there was a time when Wang Corporation had "an 80% market share" for dedicated word-processing computers. Almost every law-office in the world had one of these machines installed, and Wang (of course) rented them. They were helplessly blind-sided by ... the IBM PC and WordStar.

Perhaps, tablet users will find a way not to have to write those reports. If the instantly real-time interactivity that we see, for example, in Facebook ("let me take a picture of and post a picture of what we're going to eat for dinner ...") could extend to ordinary business day-to-day, thanks to the tablet, then maybe we don't really need those spreadsheets after all?

Who knows. But, worth thinking about.
 
Old 01-04-2013, 02:06 AM   #10
kooru
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2012
Location: Italy
Distribution: Slackware, NetBSD
Posts: 1,252
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 259Reputation: 259Reputation: 259
Signed!
 
Old 01-05-2013, 08:40 AM   #11
mostlyharmless
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2008
Distribution: Slackware -current (multilib) with kernel 3.15.5
Posts: 1,497
Blog Entries: 12

Rep: Reputation: 154Reputation: 154
Signed, and made a financial donation too...

H_TeXMeX_H, we'll never get tired of your paranoid musings, even though you're probably a Microsoft employee determined to make conspiracy theories seem implausible by the "boy who cries wolf" mechanism.
 
Old 01-06-2013, 04:33 AM   #12
H_TeXMeX_H
Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269
Look, if I cry wolf and the wolf is upon us, it's too late.
 
Old 01-08-2013, 02:20 PM   #13
Dogs
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2009
Location: Houston
Distribution: Slackware 13.37 x64
Posts: 105

Rep: Reputation: 25
Looks like Ubuntu is on the right track.

--EDIT-- Might help to provide a link...
UEFI Secure Boot and Ubuntu

I figured out how to get slackware 14 x64 installed/bootable from a EFI bootable USB drive, too. That's with secure boot disabled, though.

I was scared shitless though, when I first powered on my laptop (came with Windoze 8) with a live CD in the drive.. Got a message to the effect of, "Unauthorized operating system detected!"

I thought, "OMG THEY BANNED LINUX!", but no.. not quite. Not yet... For now you can disable it without massive hax.


Signed, donated.

Last edited by Dogs; 01-08-2013 at 02:29 PM.
 
Old 01-09-2013, 05:24 PM   #14
NyteOwl
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2008
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Distribution: Slackware, OpenBSD, others periodically
Posts: 512

Rep: Reputation: 138Reputation: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogs View Post
Looks like Ubuntu is on the right track.
Their solution, at its core requires a base certificate signature by Microsoft. Having Linux, and every other operating system, effectively hostage to Microsoft is not what I'd call "being on the right track".

Last edited by NyteOwl; 01-09-2013 at 05:26 PM. Reason: Fixed typo
 
Old 01-12-2013, 04:32 AM   #15
H_TeXMeX_H
Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269
Quote:
Originally Posted by NyteOwl View Post
Their solution, at its core requires a base certificate signature by Microsoft. Having Linux, and every other operating system, effectively hostage to Microsoft is not what I'd call "being on the right track".
I agree. Ubuntu has already strayed so far from the the right track that I do NOT consider it a Linux distro. It is a Window$ variant.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LXer: Free Software Foundation Thinks It Can Stop SecureBoot LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 12-29-2012 09:11 AM
LXer: Linux Foundation Comes Up With SecureBoot Plan LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 10-11-2012 06:11 AM
LXer: Debian Developers Discuss UEFI SecureBoot Plans LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 07-10-2012 12:50 PM
LXer: Free Software Foundation Europe says I Love Free Software LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 02-15-2010 07:50 PM
LXer: Free Software Foundation Europe says I ? Free Software LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 02-15-2010 07:20 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:14 AM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration