Slashdot Mirror
UEFI Secure Boot Booted From Debian 9 'Stretch' (theregister.co.uk)
Debian's release team has decided to postpone its implementation of Secure Boot. From a report: In a release update from last week, release team member Jonathan Wiltshire wrote that "At a recent team meeting, we decided that support for Secure Boot in the forthcoming Debian 9 'stretch' would no longer be a blocker to release. The likely, although not certain outcome is that stretch will not have Secure Boot support." "We appreciate that this will be a disappointment to many users and developers," he continued, "However, we need to balance that with the limited time available for the volunteer teams working on this feature, and the risk of bugs being introduced through rushed development." The decision not to offer Secure Boot support at release leaves Debian behind Red Hat and Suse, making it the only one of Linux's three main branches not to support the heir-to-BIOS and the many security enhancements it offers.
This is an example of why 20 years later, I'm still running RedHat/Fedora/Centos family distros.
I want all my FLOSS software to work. And I want business integration to work too. I don't want to have to choose them because they're not actually in conflict.
If you want to dual-boot Linux and a recent version of Windows (the only reason to leave SecureBoot turned on), you're running an Ubuntu derivative.
Microsoft wouldn't let such a small thing stop them.
People should say: How are they working around this?
Several of my boards support UEFI boot, or CSM Boot but the Secure Boot Portion can be turned off (or is absent in the case of one of my boards. I have one of the few early boards that has UEFI but not Secure Boot.). You can do a UEFI Boot without SecureBoot Verification like Macs do,
I wish we would stop using the word Security when we really mean Vendor Lock-in.
Lot of FUD being spread in this article. Debian certainly supports UEFI, the *true* "heir-to-BIOS." Secure Boot was a terrible technology from the start. It's disappointing that they weren't able to finish work on it in time, but this certainly isn't the huge issue this article is making it out to be. The majority of Debian installations are going to be in virtualised environments in the first place. Desktop users are probably going to be on testing or another Debian derivative. It kind of makes me angry that Ubuntu didn't contribute this code to Debian straight away, but what can you do.
When are they going to finally get rid of systemd?
Can't believe adults rant so much, so often about systemd. Get over it, for goodness sake...
Since "secure" boot is anything but and basically just DRM on steroids, it does not matter much in real life. The only thing to do about it is to make sure to buy hardware were it can be turned off.
As to "heir of BIOS", well maybe. At this time it is still usually a step back. For example, I have an utterly stupid Acer UEFI implementation that cannot boot from memory stick in either mode. It can boot from USB CDROM (go figure), so for a new installation I have to keep an USB CDROM burner and some rewriteables around. That is not impressive at all. It also keeps its UEFI boot files in a non-standard location, just to make things more interesting.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Secure Boot has no lawful purpose, at all. It is designed only to prevent you using your device how you want.
The mission of "Secure Boot" is not to secure any computers, but to secure Microsoft's revenue stream.
Yes, you may be able to disable it on your desktop, but will this situation continue? Remember those Surface RT tablets?
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
and amd / intel / supermicro / others have the server market that is very non windows to deal with as well.
How horrible that consumers are given the choice as to which OEM to buy from, and can presumably determine if a new machine meets their needs or not in this regard
Provided they have the budget for a new machine in the first place.
Checking before buying doesn't work in several situations. One is switching from Windows to Linux or from Windows to a Windows/Linux dual boot without wanting to have to buy all new hardware. Another is minors and charities, which tend to depend on donations of random hardware by those who haven't done research. A third is when after doing the research, you conclude that no manufacturers offer Linux-friendly laptop or convertible laptop/tablet PCs in a particular size range factor with a warranty in your country.
I got a weird format for slashdot just now, assumed either it was a glitch, or they'd updated it to require javascript (it works passably without, and is pretty snappy).
So I spun up a VM and went into this story and enabled jscript.
It said it was allowing 77 (!) scripts to run. It took 20 or so seconds to actually finish loading. It gave me a facefull of junk clickbait.
Is this what I'm missing but blocking JS? I'm not missing it at all.
VM image deleted. Goodbye "modern" world, I'm better off without this.
I recommend other people disable JS and see how it suddenly looks and feels.
(I wonder how long before whipslash deletes this post).
Time to consider The Hurd.
good luck finding parts from which to build a compact laptop.
In addition many manufacturers will build you a workstation to your requirements, you just have to make it worth their while to do it.
Looks at list of laptops sold by System76
How would an individual go about "mak[ing] it worth their while" for System76, ZaReason, ThinkPenguin, and other Linux laptop makers to make a laptop smaller than 13 inches?
Looks at pricing of base configuration of said System76 laptops
What goes into a Linux laptop to make it cost as much as two or three entry-level Windows laptops?
It's a cancer. It's not worth the effort of using. If you buy a new system, most people will immediately disable it for some things to work properly. Virtualization isn't enabled by default, meaning, running VMs won't work unless you have the know-how to edit the configuration. It's stupid and ultimately useless.