zlacker

[return to "Pluton is not currently a threat to software freedom"]
1. marcod+J9[view] [source] 2022-01-09 03:31:00
>>foodst+(OP)
Will this allow my computer, in the future, to be as locked as current smartphones? Will this allow software to refuse to run or services to refuse to work depending on third party software I have installed?
◧◩
2. mjg59+Aa[view] [source] 2022-01-09 03:38:06
>>marcod+J9
Everything needed to lock down your computer as much as a phone already exists, there's no need for a TPM or Pluton to do so.
◧◩◪
3. no_tim+6R[view] [source] 2022-01-09 11:38:26
>>mjg59+Aa
...no? How would MS force me to install an AGESA update that supposedly restricts me in booting unsigned code? That's where the newly announced remote attestation comes in.

On the other hand, on PCs with Pluton chips they can change their minds any second.

◧◩◪◨
4. mjg59+eT[view] [source] 2022-01-09 12:02:04
>>no_tim+6R
The described functionality of Pluton doesn't allow it to prevent you from booting unsigned code. Your system firmware would need to ask Pluton for permission, and if it doesn't do so then no number of Pluton firmware updates is going to make it able to prevent that.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. no_tim+GU[view] [source] 2022-01-09 12:19:49
>>mjg59+eT
On a second though, you are right. I mentally confused "not being able to boot unsigned code" and them being able to make booting unsigned code as useless as possible through attestation (possibly no internet, no DRM'd software, legally acquired or not)
[go to top]