Re: the ghost of UEFI and Micr0$0ft
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 8:08 AM, Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-06-07 at 06:20 -0400, Tom H wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Roger Leigh <rleigh@codelibre.net> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 01:07:23PM -0400, Tom H wrote:
>> >>
>> >> What's non-free about signing the "boot-chain"?
>> >
>> > Do I have the freedom to build and install and boot my own kernel?
>> >
>> > No? Looks like I lost the freedom to have any semblance of control
>> > over my own hardware.
>>
>> You can buy a key from Verisign, etc...
>>
>> I'll be buying a new laptop in December/January and I'll give that a
>> try. We'll see how much of a PitA it's going to be.
>
> If I should need to buy a key from a company handling the UEFI keys,
> assumed it's not a Linux related company, to use Linux with a self build
> kernel, I would drop Linux soon. Fortunately there are laws against
> monopolies, so I suspect that for x86_64 mobos UEFI always can be
> disabled.
>
> I also won't use a closed source bootloader-bootloader from a company
> like Microsoft. They often offended laws and I'm sure they'll continue
> to violate laws.
You're already paying a for-profit company for your computer so this
is "just" another USD 99 for a key.
The shim boot loader that's being planned by Fedora would be signed by
Microsoft but is open source [1] - it wouldn't be accepted in Fedora
otherwise.
1. https://github.com/mjg59/shim
Reply to: