On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 09:20:52AM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote: > On Vi, 11 iun 21, 15:07:11, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > > Secure Boot (Microsoft's attempt to stop you from using Linux) relies on > > UEFI booting, and therefore this was one of the driving forces behind it, > > but not the *only* driving force. If your machine doesn't use Secure Boot, > > don't worry about it. It won't affect you. > > While I'm not a fan of Microsoft: > > https://wiki.debian.org/SecureBoot#What_is_UEFI_Secure_Boot_NOT.3F
Quoting from there: "Microsoft act as a Certification Authority (CA) for SB, and they will sign programs on behalf of other trusted organisations so that their programs will also run." Now two questions: - do you know any other alternative CA besides Microsoft who is capable of effectively doing this? In a way that it'd "work" with most PC vendors? - is there any internationally legal binding of Microsoft for them to provide that service in the future, in a fair and non discriminatory way? I'd be surprised if the answer to /any/ of those questions were "yes". We do have a dependency on Microsoft's "good will" here. Whether we like it or not. Cheers - t
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
