Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 22nd Jun 2012 23:17 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu After Fedora, Ubuntu has now also announced how it's going to handle the nonsense called "Secure" Boot. The gist: they'll use the same key as Fedora, but they claim they can't use GRUB2. "In the event that a manufacturer makes a mistake and delivers a locked-down system with a GRUB 2 image signed by the Ubuntu key, we have not been able to find legal guidance that we wouldn't then be required by the terms of the GPLv3 to disclose our private key in order that users can install a modified boot loader. At that point our certificates would of course be revoked and everyone would end up worse off." So, they're going to use the more liberally licensed efilinux loader from Intel. Only the bootloader will be signed; the kernel will not.
Thread beginning with comment 523435
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Blowing the Horn of Jericho
by transami on Sat 23rd Jun 2012 05:08 UTC
transami
Member since:
2006-02-28

And the walls fell!

Damn it people. Wake up! We should all be MAD AS HELL about this. How have we become so passive as to sit idly by "making the best of the situation" while one company effectively takes control of the entire PC industry with a single edict.

Remember Microsoft just wrapped up long drawn-out anti-trust litigation not so many years ago. How did that turn out? Looks to me as if they greased every filthy politico palm they could. Now that they've paid their graft it seems they are free to run rough-shod over anything and everything.

We should not accept this situation whatsoever. It is unacceptable for a single company to dictate that every other company must pay them to have the right to run software on a computer solely on the basis that they write more popular software for that computer. A company can only get away with such a thing if they are exerting monopoly power. This is obvious!

If secure boot is to be acceptable, licenses must be essentially free and handled by an independent not-for-profit standards body.

Where are the lawyers? B/c this has to be stopped.

Reply Score: 11

RE: Blowing the Horn of Jericho
by vaette on Sat 23rd Jun 2012 14:24 in reply to "Blowing the Horn of Jericho"
vaette Member since:
2008-08-09

So you figure that the way towards software freedom is having the government regulate what software and hardware we may make?

Reply Parent Score: 1

ricegf Member since:
2007-04-25

"independent not-for-profit standards body" != "the government"

For example:

"ICANN (From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN, /ˈaɪkæn/ eye-kan) is a nonprofit private organization headquartered in Los Angeles, California, United States, that was created on September 18, 1998, and incorporated on September 30, 1998[1] to oversee a number of Internet-related tasks previously performed directly on behalf of the U.S. government by other organizations, notably the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA), which ICANN now operates."

Reply Parent Score: 2