Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 23rd Sep 2011 22:22 UTC, submitted by kragil
Windows The story about how secure boot for Windows 8, part of UEFI, will hinder the use of non-signed binaries and operating systems, like Linux, has registered at Redmond as well. The company posted about it on the Building Windows 8 blog - but didn't take any of the worries away. In fact, Red Hat's Matthew Garrett, who originally broke this story, has some more information - worst of which is that Red Hat has received confirmation from hardware vendors that some of them will not allow you to disable secure boot.
Thread beginning with comment 490644
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Stop whining!
by gilboa on Sat 24th Sep 2011 20:23 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Stop whining!"
gilboa
Member since:
2005-07-06

"What *exactly* is the benefit of this technology, other than the obvious one for Microsoft?


The benefit is that when Windows is inevitably compromised by a piece of malware, the malware can't write itself to the boot sector.
"

OK, you do realize that once the OS is compromised, nothing stops the malware from deactivating the signature check mechanism and installing a key logger as a signed update or even throw in a modified kernel image while they are at it, right? Once a software gains "root/admin" *user* access to the system, this is end game for *any* security mechanism. (Even SELinux in strict mode can be circumvented given sufficiently determined attacker).
*Even* if Microsoft goes the extra mile (and they are most likely thinking about it) and disable installation of legacy applications and/or any applications that are not downloaded from MS Market - this still will be useless against OS vulnerabilities.

Walled garden, nothing more, nothing less.

- Gilboa

Edited 2011-09-24 20:26 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Stop whining!
by Icaria on Sun 25th Sep 2011 05:17 in reply to "RE[3]: Stop whining!"
Icaria Member since:
2010-06-19

Well that's not actually accurate. This isn't like BIOS, where you can run a desktop application in Windows to update your BIOS image. Windows, regardless of the runlevel, has no direct access to the UEFI image.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Stop whining!
by gilboa on Sun 25th Sep 2011 07:59 in reply to "RE[4]: Stop whining!"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

Well that's not actually accurate. This isn't like BIOS, where you can run a desktop application in Windows to update your BIOS image. Windows, regardless of the runlevel, has no direct access to the UEFI image.


I'm not sure I see the connection.
You claimed that having secure boot *improves* the security of the OS, I (easily) disproved it by pointing the having secure drivers and boot sector is *completely* irrelevant once the OS itself is compromised - either by abusing an OS exploit or by (ab)using end-user stupidity.

In the long term secure boot can and will only be used to create a walled garden around the Windows eco-system; nothing more, nothing less.

- Gilboa

Reply Parent Score: 2