Re: [OT] Re: the ghost of UEFI and Micr0$0ft
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 9:51 AM, Camaleón <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 15:07:42 -0400, Tom H wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Camaleón <email@example.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.