zlacker

[return to "Remote Attestation is coming back"]
1. robot+ig[view] [source] 2022-07-30 00:54:13
>>gjsman+(OP)
Remote attestation or not, "Software freedom" fighters should understand that things happen based on some user base need. Somebody needed this and they added it, whoever needs it doesn't care if they can't run linux on it. If the user cares about running anything else on the hardware, they will add a way to disable the feature. it is all about the user need.

if you are a secondary priority user on some hardware, the way to fix it is to focus on becoming important enough to be prioritized instead of fearing some technology will limit things.

◧◩
2. cesarb+Us[view] [source] 2022-07-30 03:44:15
>>robot+ig
> Somebody needed this and they added it, whoever needs it doesn't care if they can't run linux on it.

Originally, the ones who "needed" features like this this are the big content distributors. Without these features, it's too easy for normal people to extract content and give copies of it to their friends and family.

As a parallel development, another one who "needed" features like this is Microsoft, for a different reason. They were taking reputational damage from malware, and needed a way to prevent malware from running before their operating system kernel (malware loading after the operating system kernel could be contained by the normal security mechanisms like ACLs).

These two development threads had enough in common that they ended up merging together, and those who want to prevent copying content can now point to security as an excuse. And yes, neither of these two groups care if you can't run Linux on your own devices.

> if you are a secondary priority user on some hardware, the way to fix it is to focus on becoming important enough to be prioritized instead of fearing some technology will limit things.

I fully agree that this is our best defense. In fact, the only reason we can still run Linux on our desktops and notebooks is that, when SecureBoot was developed, Linux was already important enough. However, this could only happen because Linux had time to grow and become important enough (while being a "secondary priority user" of the hardware) before things started to become limited. Had SecureBoot come before Linux became important enough, running third party operating systems would not have been allowed, and Linux would not have had a chance to grow and gain importance.

[go to top]