Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 22nd Jun 2012 23:17 UTC
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 523683
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:
2008-08-19
No it won't, because it will be very clear to a court that Microsoft aren't even close to breaking anti-trust laws in this case.
Yes, they're forcing their vendors to support a technology that could have anti-competitive consequences. But they're also openly taking steps to mitigate those consequences - they're forcing vendors to allow secure boot to be disabled by the user (except on ARM), and they're also providing their key-signing service to those who don't have the influence to get their own keys distributed by vendors.
In short, it's certainly an anti-competitive move, and a rather devious one at that. But it's done in such a way that there's no way the laws can touch it.