Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Free Software Foundation Campaign related to "Secure Boot"

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    16

    Default Free Software Foundation Campaign related to "Secure Boot"

    There is a campaign to make sure the "Secure Boot" feature of UEFI (which is starting to replace the BIOS in newer x86 motherboards) does not prevent running free operating systems.
    There are already almost 20,000 signers.

    The campaign can be found at http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-...stricted-boot/
    Canonical also have a statement at http://blog.canonical.com/2011/10/28...pact-on-linux/
    Some good information can be found at http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/5552.html
    There was also a post on lwn.net earlier this year. see http://lwn.net/Articles/447381/

    If you care about free OSs, you should really sign the statement to show your support. Hopefully is achieves something.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Azmo View Post
    There is a campaign to make sure the "Secure Boot" feature of UEFI (which is starting to replace the BIOS in newer x86 motherboards) does not prevent running free operating systems.
    There are already almost 20,000 signers.
    First of all, it has the potential of preventing non-signed OS's of running depending on the motherboard manufacturer who ultimately controls what is implemented. It is up to them if they want to allow non "Secureboot" OS's to run (through the ability of disabling it). Second, petitions have never really worked. What is really needed is a lot of communication between the open source community and the motherboard manufacturers. The likes of Novell, Redhat, Canonical, AMD, Intel, etc have to start making real attempts at contacting these manufacturers and making sure that the compatibility is maintained (and while they are at it address other items like proper ACPI implementations and motherboard feature integration).

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    First of all, it has the potential of preventing non-signed OS's of running depending on the motherboard manufacturer who ultimately controls what is implemented. It is up to them if they want to allow non "Secureboot" OS's to run (through the ability of disabling it). Second, petitions have never really worked. What is really needed is a lot of communication between the open source community and the motherboard manufacturers. The likes of Novell, Redhat, Canonical, AMD, Intel, etc have to start making real attempts at contacting these manufacturers and making sure that the compatibility is maintained (and while they are at it address other items like proper ACPI implementations and motherboard feature integration).
    This does not contradict what I said.
    Petitions can have an impact, especially if many people sign it.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Azmo View Post
    This does not contradict what I said.
    Petitions can have an impact, especially if many people sign it.
    Not when it comes to online petitions and especially when you are talking about non-windows support. You need corporations talking to them. If anything online petitions often hurt their own cause by giving them a number that they can use to to see if the market is even viable or not. I can't count the number of times a online petition reguarding linux support has failed miserably, I can however count the number of time one has worked, 0.
    Last edited by deanjo; 11-05-2011 at 08:43 PM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,584

    Default

    I also remember Bioware running a poll themselves as to what platforms should be supported. After tens of thousands of replies, linux took 54%, even beating out the likes of xbox 360 / playstation 3 / wii / etc by a heathy margin. This was well after Neverwinter Nights and still Bioware has not released a linux version of their games since.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    772

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    First of all, it has the potential of preventing non-signed OS's of running depending on the motherboard manufacturer who ultimately controls what is implemented. It is up to them if they want to allow non "Secureboot" OS's to run (through the ability of disabling it).
    Users/sysadmins shouldn't have to choose between secure boot with an OEM PK and disabling secure boot. Board vendors should provide some way to reset the board into "setup mode" so that the user/admin can always use secure boot with the PK of their choice (including their own personal/corporate/institutional PK if so desired).

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •