Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: LF: There's Less Concern About ARM UEFI SecureBoot

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,365

    Default LF: There's Less Concern About ARM UEFI SecureBoot

    Phoronix: LF: There's Less Concern About ARM UEFI SecureBoot

    James Bottomley wrote a new blog post this morning about why the Linux Foundation really isn't concerned about UEFI SecureBoot on ARM hardware (smart-phones, tablets, etc) compared to the work they are doing on x86 PCs with UEFI SecureBoot support for Linux...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTIzNzA

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Houston, TX area
    Posts
    44

    Default

    Regardless of how much the phone/tablet vendor tries to lock down and secure a device, generally within a few weeks of any new product launch, the modding community achieves success in rooting the device.
    1) root and unlocked bootloader are completely different things

    2) there are several devices which have not been cracked due to high security hardware and competent software implementation

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    405

    Default

    Well, I've always called the Windows sticker a warning label. Now it really is, because there's a good chance that the computer won't run anything else.

    Eventually, with x86 PCs, Windows XP/Vista/7 will go out of support, and Microsoft will probably make it mandatory that for the Windows certification, you can't turn off Restricted Boot there, either.

    Then all they have to do is invalidate the signature for the shim bootloader that Fedora, Ubuntu, and the Linux Foundation are using, and Linux will not run at all, even in Crippled Mode. (The Restricted Boot method that they are using won't allow custom kernels or unsigned kernel modules. Whatever your distribution ships is what you're stuck with.)

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    321

    Default

    All these arguments aren't convincing. If LF attacks M$ on the desktop, why is Appl€ getting a free pass on mobile, just because of "not likely to agree". The stance should be principal.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    261

    Default


  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by daniels View Post
    $ in M$ denotes de-facto monopoly and charge for every inevitable installation.
    The picture hence is utter rubbish.

Posting Permissions

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