Nam bosta UEFI varnostni zagon in Microsoft preprečila poganjanje alternativnih operacijskih sistemov?

morbo je 21. sep 2011 ob 23:05 izjavil:

Iatromantis je 21. sep 2011 ob 21:58 izjavil:

...ki so poleg priložnosti, ob trenutku pričetka masovne uporabe, s seboj ravno zaradi odprtosti prinesli vse te nevarnosti, s katerimi FUDajo mediji in politika,...

Katere so te nevarnosti PC platforme (ki naj bi jih tale sistem odpravil)?

The security that UEFI has to offer with secure boot means that most customers will have their systems protected against boot loader attacks.

For the enthusiast who wants to run older operating systems, the option is there to allow you to make that decision.

OEMs are free to choose how to enable this support and can further customize the parameters as described above in an effort to deliver unique value propositions to their customers.

Who is in control?

At the end of the day, the customer is in control of their PC.

For Windows customers, Microsoft is using the Windows Certification program to ensure that systems shipping with Windows 8 have secure boot enabled by default, that firmware not allow programmatic control of secure boot (to prevent malware from disabling security policies in firmware), and that OEMs prevent unauthorized attempts at updating firmware that could compromise system integrity.

Torej uporabnik z "dual boot" ne bo imel težav in bo delalo tako kot sedaj?

A zdaj je že vsak "dual boot" uporabnik kar navdušenec?

...ne piše, da bodo kar vsi OEM planili na začetku in onemogočili izklop, ampak realno pa je, da nekateri bodo.

Moje prvotno vprasanje je bilo tudi: kako nerodno bo zaganjanje nepodpisanega programja in ali bo za vsako spremembo tega potrebno popravljati EFI nastavitve?

Skratka, radi bi nas zaprli v zlato kletkoTM.

...we designed the firmware to allow the customer to disable secure boot. However, doing so comes at your own risk.

OEMs are free to choose how to enable this support and can further customize the parameters as described above in an effort to deliver unique value propositions to their customers.

Cold1 je 23. sep 2011 ob 13:32 izjavil:

Torej uporabnik z "dual boot" ne bo imel težav in bo delalo tako kot sedaj?

Ja.

Icematxyz je 23. sep 2011 ob 14:19 izjavil:

Tega ne ves. Ker ne ves kako bodo stvari implementirane. Bodo pa razlicno glede na razlicne proizvajalce strojne opreme.

Tako je če lastnega vira ne prebereš na katerega se sklicuješ.

[Da bo dual boot možen, kot do sedaj] ne ves. Ker ne ves kako bodo stvari implementirane. Bodo pa razlicno glede na razlicne proizvajalce strojne opreme.

Nič ne bo dražje - tale funkcionalnost (vklop/izklop varnega zagona) je v pasivni obliki (vedno izklopljena) na voljo v vseh trenutnih matičnih ploščah - če je novejši modeli ne bodo imeli, se pač ne bodo prodajali...

Kakšen vpliv ima ta možnost na načrtovanje novih modelov m. plošč je menda jasno.

Kam točno pa se namesti Grub 2 in a moram slučajno v BIOS, da preklapljam med zaganjanjem različnih OS in ali je dodal Microsoft podporo še za kakšen drug ne le Microsoft OS v svoj "boot loader"?

In tudi v neki bližnji in srednji prihodnosti sam ne vem, če verjamem najbolj, da bo kaj drugače!

Če bom kdaj spet uporabljal Windows upam samo, da boste uporabniki Windows OS vsaj toliko prisebni, da bo takrat Windows OS vsaj približno še deloval malo drugače, kot kak iPhone ali Xbox 360!

Stran od tega, kjer je bil Microsoft doslej uspešen se premika "PC Business" da. To se celo strinjam.

...in zadovoljni uporabniki, kjer nič več ne rabijo postoriti sami, ker nekdo [Google, ane Ice] ve vse bolje, kot oni sami. Komaj čakam!

Windows 8 certification does not require that the user be able to disable UEFI secure boot, and we've already been informed by hardware vendors that some hardware will not have this option.

Why is this a problem? Because there's no central certification authority for UEFI signing keys. Microsoft can require that hardware vendors include their keys. Their competition can't. A system that ships with Microsoft's signing keys and no others will be unable to perform secure boot of any operating system other than Microsoft's. No other vendor has the same position of power over the hardware vendors. Red Hat is unable to ensure that every OEM carries their signing key. Nor is Canonical. Nor is Nvidia, or AMD or any other PC component manufacturer. Microsoft's influence here is greater than even Intel's.

What does this mean for the end user? Microsoft claim that the customer is in control of their PC. That's true, if by "customer" they mean "hardware manufacturer". The end user is not guaranteed the ability to install extra signing keys in order to securely boot the operating system of their choice. The end user is not guaranteed the ability to disable this functionality. The end user is not guaranteed that their system will include the signing keys that would be required for them to swap their graphics card for one from another vendor, or replace their network card and still be able to netboot, or install a newer SATA controller and have it recognise their hard drive in the firmware. The end user is no longer in control of their PC.

Microsoft's rebuttal is entirely factually accurate. But it's also misleading. The truth is that Microsoft's move removes control from the end user and places it in the hands of Microsoft and the hardware vendors. The truth is that it makes it more difficult to run anything other than Windows. The truth is that UEFI secure boot is a valuable and worthwhile feature that Microsoft are misusing to gain tighter control over the market. And the truth is that Microsoft haven't even attempted to argue otherwise.

Linux jedro nima kaj veliko s tem, da je OS "posekal" konkurenco. Uporabnike ne briga, kaj je v notranjosti, njih samo zanima če stvar deluje.

Tudi Microsoft se ne brani FOSS ter aktivno sodeluje na tem področju. Nikjer še nisem prebral, da bi Microsoft zaničeval FOSS per se.

Glede UEFI secure boot ... če prav razumem, lahko to uporabljajo tudi drugi operacijski sistemi, vse kar je potrebno je dodaten certifikat. Domnevam, da nam bodo proizvajalci matičnih plošč omogočili nalaganje in upravljanje certifikatov, ni pa tudi izključeno, da bodo imele matične že privzeto certifikate Canonical-a in podobnih podjetij.

The truth is that UEFI secure boot is a valuable and worthwhile feature that Microsoft are misusing to gain tighter control over the market. And the truth is that Microsoft haven't even attempted to argue otherwise.

Poglej si npr: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/openness... Kar tako iz glave se pa spomnim na CodePlex, Microsoftovo pomoč pri pohitritvi PHPja za IIS ter interoperabilnost Windows Azure z različnimi jeziki.

Meni tudi ne. Kje je Microsoft kaj takšnega izjavil?

For Windows customers, Microsoft is using the Windows Certification program to ensure that systems shipping with Windows 8 have secure boot enabled by default, that firmware not allow programmatic control of secure boot (to prevent malware from disabling security policies in firmware), and that OEMs prevent unauthorized attempts at updating firmware that could compromise system integrity.

Cenovno se jim je najbolj splačal Linux (ker je odprt, zastonj in ker ga dobro poznajo). Število uporabnikov je edina stvar s katero se lahko Google pohvali pri Androidu.

Saj sem rekel višje, naj govorijo tako, kot delajo. To je vse. Ne pa da je na javnih razpisih FOSS slab za ekonomijo, delovna mesta in "world peace" in ne vem kaj še vse nimajo pa nobenih težav po drugi strani obdavčevati Linux vendorjev in s tem ustvarjati prihodkov. Torej Microsoft je za FOSS? Ali samo takrat, ko to njim ustreza, drugače pa seveda ne?

Preberi si razpravo pa boš videl. Če ti ni za brat:

Nisi povedal alternative? Drugače pa da, število uporabnikov je znatno.

Linux vendorje obdavčujejo zaradi kršenja patentov. To je popolnoma druga debata.

Sem prebral. Nikjer ne piše, da proizvajalci plat ne smejo omogočiti odstranjevanje Windows certifikata ali nalaganje svojih.

For Windows customers, Microsoft is using the Windows Certification program to ensure that systems shipping with Windows 8 have secure boot enabled by default, that firmware not allow programmatic control of secure boot (to prevent malware from disabling security policies in firmware), and that OEMs prevent unauthorized attempts at updating firmware that could compromise system integrity.

Napišejo svoje jedro oz. ga kupijo od drugega proizvajalca?