Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 29th Dec 2012 16:37 UTC
Linux It's sad that we need this, but alas - Matthew Garret has made a list of Linux distributions that boot on Windows 8 PCs with Secure Boot enabled. Tellingly enough, the list is short. Very short. Can someone hack this nonsense into oblivion please?
Permalink for comment 546701
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: All this fuss for what?
by Doc Pain on Mon 31st Dec 2012 02:10 UTC in reply to "RE: All this fuss for what?"
Doc Pain
Member since:

"This is a great move to allow a trusted chain of execution on consumer PC's, used correctly it will drastically reduce the risk we face from malware.

Wow, really? Will it prevent malware running as my user from harvesting my data? Will it prevent malware running as my user from participate in a botnet? Will it prevent social engineering?
No? Fat lot of good it does, then.

But it says "secure" on the box! So it's secure! You don't want to disable it, or you'll catch a virus! :-)

No, honestly: "Secure Boot" emphasizes security during the boot process only. If it would protect against common malware, virus infections, social engineering and human stupidity, it would require a different name, and as repeated in the article several times, "signed by Microsoft". :-)

Of course it adds some protection that may even be useful in MICROS~1 land, but remember that not everyone is using "Windows" or wants to use it, or even wants to deal with it (even if it's just for the purpose of getting rid of the restrictions it implies). The best way would of course be to have an option to revert the UEFI "back to normal" as "Secure Boot" isn't needed to perform an OS boot in the first place. Deals between MICROS~1 (with their idea of how "security" should work) and OEMs will probably prevent such a simple solution...

Reply Parent Score: 4