Well it works more or less the same as the https thing in the web browser. Everything is exploitable, but properly managed can at least minimize the risk.
It is completely up to the hardware manufacturers which keys they want to preinstall. My preference would be none, and let the user install it. Here Microsoft acts as a CA, just like any other CA do. Anyone else can sign, but Microsoft was one of the few with the operation in place to go out and deal with many of the vendors.
Well that's how the CA business work; just that in this case it's about hardware manufacturers, not browser/OS vendors. I don't think it's a good idea from a security perspective since it trusts things by default, and can have really bad consequences when a CA is compromised. But that's how it work for now.
No it defeats no point, and Microsoft is free to accept or deny just about anything. Properly implemented secure boot increases your security by letting you decide what the machine should boot and prevent it from booting unknown or potentially malware infected operating system. That is a good feature. It has nothing to do with preventing competition.
Won what battle? There is no battle. They just managed to get their key into the hardware manufacturers and happen to conveniently sell access to that. Nothing stops anyone else from doing the same.
XP64 worked just fine as long as you ran it on supported hardware and used only supported software. It was never mainstream, but it sure wasn't a joke.
Dude as someone that has to work on PCs six days a week let me make ONE thing clear, there is NOTHING extra you gotta do to pwn XP, that OS is oooolllllldddddd, okay? It has had 3 service packs, God knows how many patches, hell when it came out a decent PC was a 700Mhz P3 with 128MB of RAM!
Look I get wanting to save old gear okay? But XP wasn't great to start with and its practically ancient now, let it RIP okay?
There's nothing wrong with an old OS as long as it is supported. It's actually often a good thing since nothing is perfect and needs time to be proven.
It's interesting if it's part of Chromium since that would mean it's open source. Google Docs is unfortunately proprietary, so it's kind of useless if you want to use free software.
But that still just verifies the source. As long as you get a binary from someone you have to trust that other person. Verifying the source does not verify the binary.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is that they don't tell you about it.
The major problem is that they turn it on EVEN if you have explicitly turned it off.
Technically they sign your key.
Exactly. The NT branch is what Windows is on now. They ceased development of the DOS branch with ME.
$99
Apple uses parts of the FreeBSD user land in OS X, and actual parts that works with the hardware and UEFI is not related to it.
Well it works more or less the same as the https thing in the web browser. Everything is exploitable, but properly managed can at least minimize the risk.
It is completely up to the hardware manufacturers which keys they want to preinstall. My preference would be none, and let the user install it. Here Microsoft acts as a CA, just like any other CA do. Anyone else can sign, but Microsoft was one of the few with the operation in place to go out and deal with many of the vendors.
Well that's how the CA business work; just that in this case it's about hardware manufacturers, not browser/OS vendors. I don't think it's a good idea from a security perspective since it trusts things by default, and can have really bad consequences when a CA is compromised. But that's how it work for now.
Absolutely and that's how secure boot is supposed to work all along. Anything else is a bug.
No it defeats no point, and Microsoft is free to accept or deny just about anything. Properly implemented secure boot increases your security by letting you decide what the machine should boot and prevent it from booting unknown or potentially malware infected operating system. That is a good feature. It has nothing to do with preventing competition.
Well you can just turn the feature off, if your board has it and it happens to be turned on.
Won what battle? There is no battle. They just managed to get their key into the hardware manufacturers and happen to conveniently sell access to that. Nothing stops anyone else from doing the same.
Now they are just riding it out, both laughing all the way to the bank.
It's actually not that bad as long as you stay out of the reactor. They didn't actually cease operation on the power plant until the year 2000.
Well, if it's not enough to make a good understanding of the situation it still isn't enough.
XP64 worked just fine as long as you ran it on supported hardware and used only supported software. It was never mainstream, but it sure wasn't a joke.
Dude as someone that has to work on PCs six days a week let me make ONE thing clear, there is NOTHING extra you gotta do to pwn XP, that OS is oooolllllldddddd, okay? It has had 3 service packs, God knows how many patches, hell when it came out a decent PC was a 700Mhz P3 with 128MB of RAM!
Look I get wanting to save old gear okay? But XP wasn't great to start with and its practically ancient now, let it RIP okay?
There's nothing wrong with an old OS as long as it is supported. It's actually often a good thing since nothing is perfect and needs time to be proven.
It's interesting if it's part of Chromium since that would mean it's open source. Google Docs is unfortunately proprietary, so it's kind of useless if you want to use free software.
I'm not sure but the article talks about QuickOffice, which like Google Docs is a proprietary product.
XCode is an IDE to develop Objective-C applications for iOS and OSX operating systems.
It's an IDE for all sorts of things. I've even seen people use it for Rails based web development.
You did when you rebuilt your user land.
Yes but you can't trust binaries which may include modifications not available in the original source code.
The kernel work started in Finland, but most of the work and most of the GNU system originated in other countries and most prominently the USA.
But that still just verifies the source. As long as you get a binary from someone you have to trust that other person. Verifying the source does not verify the binary.