Slashdot Mirror


Spanish Open Source Group Files Complaint Over Microsoft Use of UEFI Secure Boot

sl4shd0rk writes "Hispalinux, which represents Spanish Open Source developers and users, has filed a complaint against Microsoft with the European Commission. 14 pages of grief cited Windows 8 as an 'obstruction mechanism' calling UEFI Secure Boot a 'de facto technological jail for computer booting systems... making Microsoft's Windows platform less neutral than ever.' On March 6 of 2012 the Commission fined Microsoft 561 million Euros for failing to offer users a choice of web browser, and there was also a 2004 ruling which found the company had abused its market position by tying Windows Media Player to Windows itself. Relations appear to remain more tense towards Windows in Europe, so there may be some hope of making UEFI more Linux-friendly. UEFI has been implicated in the death of Samsung laptops running Linux."

3 of 154 comments (clear)

  1. Re:I hope they make the right decision.... by 0123456 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As long as savvy users can disable/override/change keys, we get the best of both worlds.

    What about 'unsavvy' users, who can currently put a CD in their drive and install the OS, but in the glorious 'secure' future will have to fiddling in the BIOS instead, if the hardware even allows it?

  2. Re:I hope they make the right decision.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Linux installation had gotten to the point that it is even easy for not so computer savvy people. In fact, installing Mint was a lot easier and
    trouble free than installing windows. Until Windows 8 and UEFI. Yes, you can turn of secure boot, but it took knowing that it should be possible
    and much searching to find out how: The option was not (visible) unless you set an UEFI administrator password. Even with secure boot turned off, it did
    not boot from CDROM. It did boot from USB key, but did not read data from it, ...
    Of course much of this is laptop specific; this is precisely the problem. There is no easy generic recipe, and the not so savvy users are going to give up, and think this Linux thing is too difficult.
    It is not acceptable that one (monopoly) os vendor has the keys to ypur hardware. Secure boot should at least be turned off or in setup mode by default, and it should be easy to install extra/your own keys.

  3. Re:I hope they make the right decision.... by jhol13 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The problem is that there is no advantage to anyone to have "secure boot".

    The "secure boot" does not prevent viruses from writing to the (pre)bootloader, it just notices if it has happened. Then the "notification" or "failure mode" is DoS, your computer won't boot. I'd rather boot with a virus than not boot.

    How about a better solution, something that *prevents* viruses from writing over the prebootloader? Something which will not brick your computer at an important meeting?

    Solution: There is an unclearable security bit in the disk controller which prevents writing to sector 0. The (pre)bootloader would set the bit in the boot, unless the boot is from USB (or a key was pressed), thus allowing OS installers to write the sector 0. All the advantages of "secure boot" and none of the disadvantages.