Mageia forum

Red Hat has just responded with more information on the Secure Boot controversy:

Red Hat, he explains, has been working with Linux suppliers, hardware manufacturers and BIOS developers since becoming aware of the issue in early August.

Garrett said that Windows 8 certification requires that hardware ship with UEFI secure boot enabled. A feature allowing secure boot to be disabled – necessary to run Linux and FreeBSD on certified systems – is not required for certification. "We've already been informed by hardware vendors that some hardware will not have this option," Garrett writes in a flow-up blog post to his original critique of the technology.

In addition, Windows 8 certification does not require that the system ship with any keys other than Microsoft's. Such systems will only securely boot Microsoft operating systems.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/09/26/uefi_linux_lock_out_row_latest/

Thus it looks increasingly likely that a significant percentage of new PC hardware (most likely the low end) will be shipping in a state that will ONLY boot Windows and nothing else UNLESS the mainboard firmware is completely overwritten. How long will it be before Apple follows suit?

ghmitch wrote:Thus it looks increasingly likely that a significant percentage of new PC hardware (most likely the low end) will be shipping in a state that will ONLY boot Windows and nothing else UNLESS the mainboard firmware is completely overwritten.

And what are the facts or the logic you base this assumption on? I'd rather wait until I see Windows8 in the market and then evaluate what is possible and what not. Everything else is just gathering bits and pieces and building assumptions on this, without seeing the real picture.

Of course, such "ifs" and "what ifs" are the lifeblood of many discussion sites and of many people who like to discuss what would have happened if the dog...

wobo wrote:]And what are the facts or the logic you base this assumption on? I'd rather wait until I see Windows8 in the market and then evaluate what is possible and what not. Everything else is just gathering bits and pieces and building assumptions on this, without seeing the real picture.

Of course, such "ifs" and "what ifs" are the lifeblood of many discussion sites and of many people who like to discuss what would have happened if the dog...

Because hardware vendors are telling Red Hat directly that their plan is precisely that. It also lines up with the current trend toward making the PC a mere appliance that becomes primarily a web client, a Windows version of Google's Chrome Book. For me, it portends an era in which only builders will have true PCs. All others will have a Windows product that will ALWAYS be a Windows product, an Apple product that will ALWAYS be an Apple product, or a Google product that will always be a Google product. For you that may seem highly speculative, but for me, I am seeing the writing on the wall. If it were just MS, I would think FUD, FUD, FUD. But when it is now being confirmed by hardware vendors, that gets my attention. You can't easily put Linux on your mobile device and I see PCs slowly slipping into the same category. The future of the PC is likely to be what is known as the "Panel Computer" which is like a giant iPad. I strongly suspect you will not be able to load Linux on that. That will relegate Linux to home built systems and systems built buy small niche vendors ... and, of course, server systems, there will always be server systems, although those are increasingly moving toward rack mount stuff that is not very useful in a home environment.

I assure you, my intent is NOT to stir up panic or fear. It is only to try to build an awareness of where this seems to be headed based on some very good information. When the hardware vendors themselves are telling Red Hat that they do not intend to support Linux any longer, that is not an "if" or a "what if", that is emerging reality.

Ah, ok, and Red Hat hearing those unspecified vendors is just rolling over and planning on selling out to MS or Google?

May be that the low budget mass market will end up with Windows-Machines on one shelf and Android machines on the other (which in my eyes is Linux, regardless what RMS says). So what? Of course there will be those who will buy those machines as they have been buying mobile phones with fixed operating systems. But I do not see the business market follow that road. And I see a shift to more independent vendors, same as today I see mobile devices with other systems than that of the original vendor.
Today it is not hard to find MS-less computers if you go off-road from mainstream (my current netbook came with SLED pre-installed). Tomorrow there will be even more suppliers with such MS- and Google-independent offers.

That's my picture. Is it more realistic than yours? We both do not know.

The answer is simple: I'll never buy a pc which can run only Windows!

O.k. I've spread the word on some forums.
It is quite a discussion now.
It is a real danger for Linux.

In Australia it's hot:
http://ostatic.com/blog/linux-australia ... re-booting

I think another interesting question regarding this issue is whether MS will try to inflict an "IP tax" on those OEMs that provide a way around secure boot. Could that also be done with a KEY provided by MS with a royalty payment for each key? The OEMs already have IP agreements with MS. Something like this could easily be tagged on, and of course the term "Linux" would never be used. The license accompanying the KEY would only imply protection from unspecified IP liabilities. Alternatively MS could simply place a tax on every system or mobo that provides an option for bypassing secure boot, justified by the same "piracy" argument.

Yes, that is true. Very, very disruptive too.
This is not only serious danger for Linux...

Btw. I don't know if people who love Windows will be happy..
http://www.ctonetworks.com/cto-blog/win ... 7-machine/
http://www.winrumors.com/microsoft-deta ... e-choices/
http://www.mywindowsclub.com/resources/ ... ws-OS.aspx

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/ ... dows_Users

It looks like something for toddlers in my eyes. Yuk..@

The Free Software Foundation is circulating a petition that they will present to OEMs in an attempt to pressure them NOT to adopt Secure Boot in a way that would lock Linux and BSD users out of the PC platform. That petition can be found HERE:

http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot-vs-restricted-boot/statement

I signed it.

Although I still think that there is much "panicking" going on about this, I regard this move of the FSF as a strong signal if enough people support it with their signature.
I did sign.

I've phoned as an example with Dell Amsterdam.
It appeares that according a technician they will have UEFI-machines, which are NOT UEFI switchable
and PC's which ARE. It depends on the kind of machine. Machines are delivered with Windows.
So this will not be very simple to master.

UEFI has always to be switchable of Linux has to have the certification of all hard- and software.

Some information:
http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructur ... 0739OSCYMS

News today, October 28, 2011

Blog Br-Linux Secure UEFI Boot, 8 Windows and Linux: a joint analysis of Red Hat and Canonical and in portuguese UEFI Secure Boot, Windows 8 e Linux: uma análise conjunta da Red Hat e Canonical


Blog Canonical: White Paper: Secure Boot impact on Linux --> October 28th, 2011 by Victor Tuson Palau


PDF ---> EFI Secure Boot Impact on Linux

Thanks macxi for the informative input towards this "UEFI Secure Boot"-chapter.

Well, it appears that Microsoft is NOT waiting for Windows 8 to start using this technology against Linux. Now that HP has dumped their Web OS Linux project, brought in a new CEO (who is the person who recently ran for state governor in the state I live in), they are now apparently in bed with MS in an attempt to revive their battered company. And MS appears to be piloting their UEFI dreams with HP hardware:

http://benjaminkerensa.com/2011/10/23/uefi-headaches-begin-linux/

You can count on that.
It's over when Linux is gone, they think.
And then Apple or whatever...

Or ... it could just be a problem with grub not properly installing to UEFI firmware. Lets hope that is the case. But I don't have much trust in this new lady at the helm of HP ... and MS ... they haven't changed their goal of ridding Linux from the face of the earth, just their strategies. We all know that they believe in choice. You can have either Windows or an Apple product, since Apple are their teammates.

Let us wait, see and be patient. It is rather early. But it is o.k. to be very, very aware of things.
And the Open Software community is aware now. Nevertheless still a lot of people don't know. Let's spread the word.
(Today I asked about UEFI on WattOS. Some-one there did not see danger...)

Hello,

I plan to change my mother board + CPU + RAM, could UEFI be a problem ? Will I have to reinstall mageia ? Or is the problem only with a new PC and Windows already installed ?

It could be something like this (I hope not...):
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UEFIBooting
I have not yet done anything with UEFI. This 3 year board I'm using had EFI (I think).
And with that I had no problem.

Well, wait and see
A least, a new install of mageia is compulsory to have Grub 2.

I don't know what to do with it when organising all those partitions (now I do it via easy redo-MBR in PCLOS+MBR), but yes.

According to ZDNet Dell will be making their computers with a BIOS switch to turn the SecureBoot option on and off.
And frankly, this isn't a Microsoft issue (however much we would like to blame them), this is an issue of the hardware manufacturers. The lazy ones will just implement it, the clever ones will allow the user to turn it on or off.
So just like you'd check various hardware components that there are kernel modules for them before buying a computer, this is just one more thing to look for.

UEFI is hardware. 'Secure Boot' is MS. It is different.