This is an articulate, succinct article that clearly outlines the concern without any FUD or name-calling. This is what I <i>want</i> to see from the FSF, and what would make me more likely to donate to them in the future.<p>I hate to turn this into an RMS rant, but this approach stands in stark relief to his "iBad/iGroan/Swindle" theatrics. This, I can appreciate. This, I can get behind. I just wish that these kinds of articles and press releases were what the FSF was most known for.
> The threat is not the UEFI specification itself, but in how computer manufacturers choose to implement the boot restrictions.<p>Exactly. When Apple shipped the first Intel Macs without Boot Camp, there wasn't outrage that Windows/Linux couldn't boot; People that cared just didn't buy them. Just don't purchase a computer that has been crippled by the manufacturer.<p>It will still be possible to build your own computer - OEMs will only bother to certify entire systems, and bare motherboard sales won't be affected by Windows Logo Certification since the class of users who build their own computers don't even notice marketing programs like that.<p>It's also likely that many, perhaps even most, certified systems will offer a means to disable or customize the secure boot functionality. You can disable Computrace, TPM, and Intel ME on virtually all machines that ship with them. This should be no different.
We have already seen this before .. I have a stack of Panasonic Toughbooks that have a locked BIOS configuration, and absolutely nothing can be done with these machines (they were thrown away, stupidly) because nobody knows the password to re-configure them to boot properly. The BIOS is completely locked down.<p>So, we will start to see this happen on a broader industry scale, and in my opinion the benefits of "secure boot" definitely do not outweigh the liability of making hardware that won't be useful in the future, simply because 'the OS it originally had on it was such utter shit to require such measures in the first place'..
I think we should fear Microsoft lowering OEM licensing prices for manufacturers who remove the option to disable secure boot. They'll probably justify that by claiming it will help reduce piracy and support costs and say that it helps bring computers to more people.
I always suspect the entertainment industry behind stuff like this. I know the only reason Netflix doesn't run on Linux(even though it runs on ChromeOS, which is linux) is because it is open source. With "secure boot", they could be sure there is no way for you to do anything with the video/audio stream except watch or listen. I think this is the real reason behind this madness. The compromise will be that your hardware will still run, but certain features will be missing without an "approved OS".
please don't forget to sign the statement <a href="http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot-vs-restricted-boot/statement" rel="nofollow">http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot-vs-restricted-boot/...</a>
This is FUD. Is windows 8 shipping? No. Are there any systems in the wild locked to windows 8. No. Have any vendors come out and said they plan to restrict FOSS from booting so I know who not to do business with? No.<p>Call me back when someone has actually locked out FOSS.
A lot of the comments, and some articles regarding the issue pose the idea that Microsoft is trying to restrict users from installing other Operating Systems in their own machines.<p>I personally doubt that is the case. Microsoft has bigger problems, and I don't think they are trying to block other OSes (especially Linux).<p>Even so, I don't think the "Secure Boot" implementation will get traction. I think, that even though it s a good idea for malware protection, the execution and wide adoption is not that easy. I believe the "Secure boot" thing won't get very far.<p>Regarding the FSF, I won't comment, I think RMS has tainted enough for me.
Let me explain why secure boot/trusted computing matters for me personally.<p>More of my life is conducted on a computer than ever. My family photos, banking transactions, files are all stored on a computer. Meanwhile, Flash and Adobe Reader installs security updates on a regular rhythm. I need my PC to be secure from drive-by downloads.<p>Getting linux to run is a secondary issue, as much as I value software freedom.