Torvalds clarifies Linux's Windows 8 Secure Boot position

Post by TheAnimus » Thu, Feb 28, 2013, 3:38 PM UTC

cooldeal wrote: post #48

krenel wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As rplnt as said: > but apparently it's beneficial for them economically to only sell Windows machines Maybe in Vietnam it happens just the opposite. It's easy to sell a computer _without_ Windows that with it. I don't get why the companies cannot sell "empty" laptops without OS installed, thought.

>Maybe in Vietnam it happens just the opposite. It's easy to sell a computer _without_ Windows that with it That is because most of the PCs end up being installed with pirated Windows by the local tech guru.

Post by recoiledsnake » Thu, Feb 28, 2013, 3:41 PM UTC

rwmj wrote: post #11

UnoriginalGuy wrote: post #4

The thing about secure boot is that it is a GOOD idea done very badly indeed. What was needed was for a trusted neutral party(or two) to be the owner of the root key, and for that organisation to hand out child keys (e.g. Microsoft, Open Source Initiative, Apple, etc) who could in turn generate child keys (all of which could be revoked). Essentially we need the "internet model" of key exchanges for this too. I cannot…

The real use for secure boot is within a single company/organization where you want to control exactly what runs on the computers you own. That's an argument for secure boot to be switched off by default, and for the companies that want it to manage their own keys. Although Microsoft will now point at me and say "but, but we need to prevent boot sector viruses!" it's telling that no other operating system except Wind…

Post by mauvehaus » Thu, Feb 28, 2013, 3:45 PM UTC

recoiledsnake wrote: post #47

speeder wrote: post #7

I always thought that the secure boot is a very, very, very bad idea. In fact the whole UEFI in general I think it is a clusterfuck of mishmashed random ideas, some good, many bad. What I intend to do personally, is attempt to don't use secure boot. And this all might explain the e-mail I got from Lenovo 10 minutes ago... I asked them for a non-Windows machine. They replied saying that they from now on only manufactu…

In Brazil or anywhere, can you buy a car with the default sound system ripped out and get a refund for it? What about without the default tires, seats or even the engine?

Post by martinced » Thu, Feb 28, 2013, 3:50 PM UTC

cooldeal wrote: post #44

Linus posted a NSFW rant about it a few days ago. The story mysteriously went off the HN front page and subsequent submissions of the story went [dead]. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5279531 Rankings graph showing a deep dive. http://hnrankings.info/5279531/ Part of Linus' email: >Guys, this is not a dick-sucking contest. If you want to parse PE binaries, go right ahead. >If Red Hat wants to deep-throat Microso…

Post by nexox » Thu, Feb 28, 2013, 4:00 PM UTC

rwmj wrote: post #34

jwoah12 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's telling that no other operating system except Windows commonly suffers from this problem. This is an honest question, as this area isn't my specialty, but could this be for the same reason that people used to perpetuate the myth that Macs don't get viruses? Attackers simply target the platform with the largest market share.

Linux servers are far more common than Windows servers, and servers usually have loads of bandwidth making them especially valuable targets for spammers and fraudsters.