[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [OT] Re: the ghost of UEFI and Micr0$0ft

On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 9:51 AM, Camaleón <noelamac@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 15:07:42 -0400, Tom H wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Camaleón <noelamac@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 19:26:55 +0200, Claudius Hubig wrote:
>>>> However, I welcome the fact that attacks on Windows will be made more
>>>> difficult, since that also means smaller botnets, fewer vulnerable
>>>> computers etc.
>>> That's the problem: we don't have to care about Windows security, it's
>>> not our business! That's a problem for the Windows users not for us.
>> Can you guarantee that there isn't and will never be a BIOS rootkit that
>> affects Linux?
>> Can you guarantee that Windows botnets don't/won't attack Linux boxes?
> Tom, that's irrelevant!
> I can cope with a linux malware but I can't cope with a third-party
> company disallowing me from booting _my own_ systems and I can't see any
> benefit in helping nor defending such restrictive position.
> To be sincere, I prefer my linux (or windows) computer got infected
> because of _my failure_ that being at the orders of a _third party_ :-/

It's not irrelevant. Irrespective of Linux using or not using Secure
Boot, I want Microsoft to take every measure the it can take to reduce
the number of compromised Windows boxes and therefore reduce the
number of attacks on my Linux boxes.

Reply to: