Linux Foundation has published the recommendations for PC makers intended to describe how UEFI secure boot specification can be implemented to interoperate well with open systems. RedHat and Canonical have released similar document. Solutions are pretty much simple:
- PC owner should be able to decide by himself whom to trust.
- There should be possibility to disable secure boot entirely.
If these requirements will be met, then we could be sure that Microsoft(or any other proprietary OS developer) won’t have any advantages over open source systems.
I have written already about the dubious UEFI secure boot technology. As you remember, Microsoft didn’t deny the accusations at all. That’s why Free Software Foundation(FSF) started a campaign against this technology. If you feel that it’s your right to choose operating system, please add your name to the statement here. If this feature is implemented, users should have full control over it. If I want to disable it, it’s my right to do so. I don’t want to be forced to use only Windows. I hope that hardware manufacturers realize that there are customers, which prefer freedom over such questionable “security”.
You have probably heard about dubious UEFI Secure Boot technology, which backed up by Microsoft. There are suspicions that this technology is just a clever ploy by Microsoft to monopolize the desktop market even more. Few days ago Microsoft responded to these accusations with their usual MS style marketing bullshit. If you’ve read that article carefully, you should have seen that they haven’t denied the accusations at all. So, Matthew Garrett from Red Hat wrote his own response, where he presents, why we can’t trust Microsoft. Here are some known facts:
Continue reading UEFI Secure Boot – Rebutting Microsoft