You are not logged in.

#1 2012-12-29 12:03:47

scjet
Member
From: Canada
Registered: 2010-12-01
Posts: 1,468

Secure Boot vs Restricted Boot

How bad is it potentially?
http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boo … /statement

I do not "personally" condone any donation$, even though they are honestly against any "technical illegalities"?, right, or wrong, legal or not, I don't care how right and good it is.
I signed this petition, and then got an email to verify my email/signature, which is fine, and dandy.

However, the next day, I also got a "would you like to help the FSF, by a small donation" ? -but it's ok, just delete that email afterwards, they're getting lots of verified signatures anyway, along with your's potentially, which is enough for the purposes' of any online, and fair, representatively-speaking,  "petition".
It's really no big deal.
So, I am just being honest here, Any other "optional" monetary decision is upto you.

Meaning, I sincerely believe this is still a very worthy, AND "Free" 'cause, with some muscle behind it.

Last edited by scjet (2012-12-29 13:46:44)

Offline

#2 2012-12-30 00:48:55

scjet
Member
From: Canada
Registered: 2010-12-01
Posts: 1,468

Re: Secure Boot vs Restricted Boot

Just to be completely fair, in regards to Microsoft's "Secure Boot", and moreso, to help (myself as well) understand it's potentials', good and bad, there was an interesting article in "Wired" awhile back...
http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/20 … cure-boot/

Offline

#3 2012-12-30 07:05:40

pablokal
Administrator
From: Nijmegen, Holland
Registered: 2010-10-12
Posts: 3,633
Website

Re: Secure Boot vs Restricted Boot

FSF is an irritating organization. After a donation I got a snail mail packet and although I have directly made clear that my donation wasn't meant to support US Mail I keep on getting these mailings.
I have offered to donate again when they stop mailing me the materials but they don't seem to be capable of that. So I must conclude it is a very rigid and incompetent organization.
About the "secure boot" and the Wired article: I think that only very well informed people will be able to turn secure boot in their favour and even then I don't like the concept at al. It is again a way to tie things to other things in a way that can only confront people with an involuntary loss of control.


Getting your questions answered here at ArchBang Forums
Please! Always give hardware info, if there is a chance that 's relevant: #lspci -vnn
On Arch(bang) and Openbox: http://stillstup.blogspot.com/

Offline

#4 2012-12-30 13:08:32

scjet
Member
From: Canada
Registered: 2010-12-01
Posts: 1,468

Re: Secure Boot vs Restricted Boot

... and being that Richard Stallman is the Founder and President of FSF (back in 1985), you'd think they'd try to be a little more up-to-date with the times, instead of, as you mentioned, still back in the "US mail" era. ?

But, for what it's worth, it's still better than having no FSF, whatsoever.

Last edited by scjet (2012-12-30 13:16:26)

Offline

#5 2013-01-03 09:45:33

kazuya
Member
Registered: 2011-01-11
Posts: 93

Re: Secure Boot vs Restricted Boot

Warning is that I did make part of this post in the ubuntu ASUS forum since I still have problems with the ASUS laptop in regards this secure boot thing. I recently purchased an ASUS k55N laptop that comes exclusively with Windows 8 from Best Buy.
ASUS laptop has this secure boot thing with EFI.
I use F2 to go into Bios and ESC to switch boot order.

Problem:
I cannot boot up any livecds or USB boot disks to then be able to run or dualboot a linux distro.
Now I am trying to completely remove or disable the Windows Boot manager so I can use the traditional BIOS where I can change boot order to CDROM, USB, etc?
I cannot even boot to the CDROM drive.

This laptop has the AMD A8-4500 CPU with 4 gig RAM Windows 8

I am currently experiencing the pain of this secured or should I say restricted boot. It is utterly garbage and dare I say criminal to totally replace the tried and trued BIOS with an exclusively Windows Boot manager. It is a distro hopper's worst nightmare. Even for non-linux user, it is an act of God to even bootup or try to replace windows 8 with windows 7.
It is beyond me how laptop manufacturers allowed this crappy boot thing to permitted on their hardware.
New user adoption of linux on the laptops will be greatly diminished due this monopolistic move by microsoft. The blame though does not fall on MS, but on manufacturers like ASUS, etc.
I wish FSF or the European Union would have done something to stop this act. I am now looking for a machine without this crapware called secure boot on it. It does have its purpose, but it completely ties the hands of its users.

Windows 8 is an aweful mess. Using it for like two days makes windows Vista look like Gold. And Vista was horrible. Windows 7 is one of the better MS products.
I am done ranting.

Last edited by kazuya (2013-01-03 09:49:35)

Offline

#6 2013-01-03 10:11:43

Mr Green
Administrator
Registered: 2010-11-07
Posts: 6,920

Re: Secure Boot vs Restricted Boot


Comments, suggestions please feel free to contact me mrgreen(at)archbang(dot)org

Offline

#7 2013-01-03 11:17:39

scjet
Member
From: Canada
Registered: 2010-12-01
Posts: 1,468

Re: Secure Boot vs Restricted Boot

@kazuya, and others who've experience this ...
- I truly hear your pain.

@everyone else:  - smile  It boils down to this, imho:
"YES" to a (collaborated) (U)EFI -I do agree with this "replacement-Bios" one, wholeheartedly.
But definitely a "NO" to Microsoft's (invasive/restricted) Secure Boot.

Unfortunately, that has not been what has happened.
So we're just gonna have to make the best of it, as Mr. G's links above, and many others', ..., suggest for now.

Last edited by scjet (2013-01-03 11:31:21)

Offline

#8 2013-01-03 11:40:33

Mr Green
Administrator
Registered: 2010-11-07
Posts: 6,920

Re: Secure Boot vs Restricted Boot

@scjet  I know grub supports UEFI booting [not sure about syslinux, possibly alpha!] Never tried it personally. Are you using it?


Comments, suggestions please feel free to contact me mrgreen(at)archbang(dot)org

Offline

#9 2013-01-03 11:46:26

scjet
Member
From: Canada
Registered: 2010-12-01
Posts: 1,468

Re: Secure Boot vs Restricted Boot

Mr Green wrote:

@scjet  I know grub supports UEFI booting [not sure about syslinux, possibly alpha!] Never tried it personally. Are you using it?

I know,
that's why this is "Off-Topic". Even UbuntuStudio12.10, as an example, supports UEFI, almost OOB, with just a little extra work.
I tried it, it works fine (as long as I disable M$ Secure Boot)

It's just "Microsoft Secure Boot" that is the real culprit for now.
Sure, there is some ever-changing, time-comsuming workarounds,  that Linux itself, is still trying to make work for us,
but Why is this even here in the first place ?!. It's just BS, thanks to the ball-less hardware manufactures'.....
The "average" User, will simply continue using Windows "HATE" (err, I meant H"8"). Some may not even bother to try installing Linux for quite awhile, until all this gets ironed out. But wait, wasn't that what M$ really wants anyway ? -Uh ya.
Windows 8 is a JOKE.
In fact, I'll go as far as to say, and agree, that Win7 (64-bit) was Microsoft's last "good" commercial/proprietary OS. (for PC's/Laptops/Workstations), but NOT servers. - And only with NO M$ Secure Boot. I've had no issues dual-booting,..., using Win7, or earlier.

Their excuse is it to protect against "Bios Malware", ... ?  Ya, well (a collaborated) UEFI effort, could have universally filled the bill as well, easily incorporating it into a new replacement BIOS,..., for almost ALL hardware systems ...

EDIT: I mean, atleast Apple has been drawing 1st-blood, and winning, for the last 10 years or so, although their methods, ...? well that's another story.
Instead, with Win8, it's just that same new/old "boring, un-creative, (iPAD/UnityAndroid) thieving--copycat, invasive, restrictive, ..., evil-empire" M$ (from the '90's), that's at it again. You gotta love the pain.
  but wtf is new ? roll
Or, atleast they think so.

But that, my friend(s), is ALL up to us.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4OTDztS_iA

Last edited by scjet (2013-01-03 13:00:37)

Offline

#10 2013-01-03 21:52:37

mike4ca
Happy (Arch|Manjaro)[B,b]ang User
From: Iowa, USA
Registered: 2011-10-17
Posts: 435

Re: Secure Boot vs Restricted Boot

My solution (as a US citizen)? Buy from System76 or Zareason.


Free Software Foundation member 10865

Offline

#11 2013-01-03 22:30:12

Mr Green
Administrator
Registered: 2010-11-07
Posts: 6,920

Re: Secure Boot vs Restricted Boot

@mike4ca Think most people would not consider other sources for hardware, you simply see so called 'deals' from the bigger players and go for it. Not looked at cost comparison but I would have thought buying a buntu laptop would be cheaper due to not having to pay licensing to MS.

Off Topic again but can get Ubuntu on your phone now smile


Comments, suggestions please feel free to contact me mrgreen(at)archbang(dot)org

Offline

#12 2013-01-04 08:01:59

scjet
Member
From: Canada
Registered: 2010-12-01
Posts: 1,468

Re: Secure Boot vs Restricted Boot

Not sure all people would want Ubuntu on their phone, or device(s).  ?
http://arstechnica.com/information-tech … -searches/
... too funny.
Dick is at it again, as always, lookin' out for the publics interest.  But since Linux doesn't directly build/sell the hardware, there probably won't be a choice.

Although I'd rather have "any" Linux distro, ..., rather than Winblowz, if only the "bigger players" would give that choice, at time of purchase.
Yet another reason, Microsoft's Secure Boot was just "unfair", along with all the other hardware makers, in how they implemented it.

Last edited by scjet (2013-01-04 08:10:34)

Offline

#13 2013-01-04 08:10:49

Mr Green
Administrator
Registered: 2010-11-07
Posts: 6,920

Re: Secure Boot vs Restricted Boot

Linux was always 'Free as in Beer' for any company to survive it needs to have an income. Servers are very costly, some staff have to paid, advertising costs money and so forth.

Here at ArchBang we only charge $10 Canadian an hour smile

Yes choice is everything


Comments, suggestions please feel free to contact me mrgreen(at)archbang(dot)org

Offline

#14 2013-01-04 08:29:30

scjet
Member
From: Canada
Registered: 2010-12-01
Posts: 1,468

Re: Secure Boot vs Restricted Boot

"Linux" could easily generate income if it just manufactured/sold it's own "Open Hardware" ? And no, I don't mean Free as in Beer here, 'cause obviously it's hardware.
Unfortunately, they would never get any "big" hardware players like nvidia, Intel,... to jump on board "openly", that is.
AMD/ATI however, is more closer to that becoming a reality for Linux.

EDIT: ...and more than $10/hour for Archbang too.   wink

Now that would finally be a real "choice", and a fair fight.

Last edited by scjet (2013-01-04 08:33:36)

Offline

#15 2013-01-04 08:39:44

Mr Green
Administrator
Registered: 2010-11-07
Posts: 6,920

Re: Secure Boot vs Restricted Boot

I think its which way the wind is blowing with Nvidia and ATI. Have always bought Nvidia cards since I started building my own machines, now I would think about changing. The same could be said about Intel vs AMD....


Comments, suggestions please feel free to contact me mrgreen(at)archbang(dot)org

Offline

#16 2013-01-04 14:40:57

scjet
Member
From: Canada
Registered: 2010-12-01
Posts: 1,468

Re: Secure Boot vs Restricted Boot

The (imho)truth is, Microsoft/Windows 8 (*with their eeprom secure-boot) has done nothing less than try to LOCK-OUT simple Linux installs. As far as *BSD goes, it's completely locked out. !
Has anyone lately, successfully installed a (u)EFI/Microsoft Secure Boot new PC-Device ? using *BSD?  -proof pleeez, with extraneous details.

I guess, depending on a few hardware makers', it AIN'T there, and that is not "Open"-anybody's fault, except for Closed-Tyranny monopolies'.
Apple/Microsoft has been (quietly), but ecstatically "giddy" about this one.

There is NO RAINBOW here with Microsoft Secure Boot, just for an example.
Other than Linux being yet again at the mercy of Microsoft/Intel/.../Hardware makers once again.
Rose-colored glasses ain't gonna help here anymore either,

It's plain wrong, be I a resident of US, australia, timbuktoo, ... or not?, it's still plain WRONG, it is simply a forlorn fact, anti-competetive,... call it what you will. It's back to the 90's, as far as Microsoft and their "pretend" competitors are concerned..
Maybe our "work/life/personal" scenario's prevent us from taking sides, and that is more than understandable, I understand.... wink
But Secure Boot doesn't make anything right for Linux, and especially for *BSD-as starving as it is. -it's just cruelty, and those "Big Players" should be VERY ashamed, at the least.

System76/Zareason/... and I myself do appreciate their effort to offer Linux support on a device,..., but, in reality, they're ALL just Clevo's, and Sager's with a "Linux sticker", and that's it. -and don't argue with this fact.

Complain to them, the real Big Hardware Players' (aka Intel/amd/nvidia/....)?, their answer is: "... Hey, buy a Tablet (made from "slave-labour"elsewhere), and DON'T worry about it.?"

Maybe the PC/Laptop really is DEAD, and Micro$oft and friends', just want to  make sure this time.
The Cell-Phone./Tablet will undoubtedly replace the home PC...., but with closed-OS's, like android, iPAD, M$,,...or VERY limited Open-OS's ?
If that is the case, then might as well just go back to pre-90's, when everyone simply had to "PAY" for any OS, and forget any "decent" Apps, unless your VISA-card is ready and willing.

I say, hey Dick, Linus/GNU/..., it's now high-time for OpenHardware, else, it'll be yet another past 20 years of the same bread-crumbs'. from the same tyrannical "big" players'.

Last edited by scjet (2013-01-04 15:26:01)

Offline

#17 2013-01-05 06:57:42

Mr Green
Administrator
Registered: 2010-11-07
Posts: 6,920

Re: Secure Boot vs Restricted Boot

Neither PC or laptops are dead, just the other night I saw a tablet with a plug in keyboard and thought that is a laptop...The MS Surface and alike are more of the same. I have used an android tablet and was not that impressed it is a bigger version of my phone with more junk on it without the phone....

At the end of the day its your money and you spend it how you want.


Comments, suggestions please feel free to contact me mrgreen(at)archbang(dot)org

Offline

#18 2013-01-05 09:37:16

scjet
Member
From: Canada
Registered: 2010-12-01
Posts: 1,468

Re: Secure Boot vs Restricted Boot

I agree,  and so there is one solution to this entire "uefi/secure boot" mess, once and for all,  that is, until the next one.
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=142464
Anyway, mine is in Post #8, and I am serious.

Of course, with my luck, it will be viewed as a sarcastic "joke", but I hope not.

Last edited by scjet (2013-01-05 09:39:22)

Offline

#19 2013-01-05 09:48:41

Mr Green
Administrator
Registered: 2010-11-07
Posts: 6,920

Re: Secure Boot vs Restricted Boot

@scjet I would like you to donate a dollar for my work on iso smile Mind you do not get banned again! on there.....

There always workarounds and its just a matter of time, when something new comes out drivers have to be made or something gets rooted. Just have to be patient.


Comments, suggestions please feel free to contact me mrgreen(at)archbang(dot)org

Offline

#20 2013-01-05 10:03:28

scjet
Member
From: Canada
Registered: 2010-12-01
Posts: 1,468

Re: Secure Boot vs Restricted Boot

Ha ha ahaha , you're too much Mr.G, you just about made be bring up my "Bailey's" that my wife got me for NewYears, with that remark.
LoL.
If I was a Doctor, then I would have lots of "patient"'s, but I'm not.
wink

Of course, Im also playing around with "gummiboot"? , as a recent option,... down the road, as well as the link you put above http://www.rodsbooks.com/efi-bootloader … eboot.html as reading material...
But, I'm still serious abut that $99 offer, that's all it is. I'm a man of my word.

EDIT: Arch could easily have done the "Garret-way" months ago, but it just ain't the Arch-way, and I honestly respect that, so I'm almost 100% they won't go for it. anyway. it's no big deal, who cares, we'll just trudge along the long-learning way. - but u're right, that's actually the better way too.

Last edited by scjet (2013-01-05 10:18:33)

Offline

#21 2013-01-05 11:28:04

Mr Green
Administrator
Registered: 2010-11-07
Posts: 6,920

Re: Secure Boot vs Restricted Boot

That bloody spell checker smile I of course meant patience arrrgghhh!!!!!!


Comments, suggestions please feel free to contact me mrgreen(at)archbang(dot)org

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB