| My vote is for a GNU/Linux desktop PC, as long as it doesn't include Secure Boot. Cheers, Elcaset Mar 11, 2013 12:00:54 PM, [email protected] wrote: >> UEFI doesn't need Microsoft's permission to boot Linux. You probably >> mean Secure Boot, > >Yes, I meant both UEFI firmware, and the SB feature that it offers. > >> but even then you don't need permission -- you can >> just disable SB if you want to boot a Linux distribution that doesn't >> include a bootloader signed with MS's key. > >Which disables UEFI's security features for Linux. > >"[...] it provides no security enhancements over booting linux with UEFI >secure boot turned off. Its sole purpose is to allow Linux to continue >to boot on platforms that come by default with secure boot enabled [...]" > >http://blog.hansenpartnership.com/linux-foundation-secure-boot-system-released/ > > > > As an alternative you can set >> your own keys for secure boot, sign your own bootloader and be >> completely sure that you are only booting your own code. > >True, all things an OEM should be doing with their Linux offerings, not >things an an end-user should have to do with their 'general purpose' >computing box. > >_______________________________________________ >Fest-list mailing list >[email protected] >https://www.peakserv.com/mailman/listinfo/fest-list > |
_______________________________________________ Fest-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.peakserv.com/mailman/listinfo/fest-list
