|
There has been a lot of commotion with Secure Boot, a technology that Microsoft wants to implement among all PC manufacturers to add an additional level of protection to those computers, at the cost of not being able to install Linux distributions unless you have signed keys by VeriSign that do allow it.
Recently, the Free Software Foundation has published a report explaining what Secure Boot is in detail and where it is analyze the solutions what do they propose Fedora o Ubuntu. |
Why is Secure Boot a problem?
Mainly because Secure Boot further distances the average user from free software. It is already a drawback that most manufacturers sell computers with Windows out of the box. For the non-technical user it is a great difficulty to have to divide the disk to run a free system, coexisting with Windows, with the risk of losing the entire installation if you do it wrong.
With Secure Boot another step is needed. Because many distributions will not have a digital signature, the user will need to disable Secure Boot before starting the new system installer. If the user is not an expert and also receives the message from the manufacturer that he is going to deactivate the security, the damage is done.
For devices with ARM systems (tablets and phones), according to the Windows 8 certification program, users should not be able to disable boot restrictions or use their own digital signature.
In addition to being unacceptable in itself, this requirement is a reversal of Microsoft's initial public position, which claimed that the Windows 8 program would not preclude other operating systems from being installed. With this deception, Microsoft has shown that it cannot be trusted.
Why the Fedora Solution is Preferable
Fedora's solution has been to join the Microsoft program and have obtained a digital signature from Verisign that can be used to sign a bootloader “fix”. This will allow GRUB 2 (licensed under the GPLv3) to boot the Linux kernel. In this way, Fedora will be “endorsed” by Microsoft and will be recognized by the firmware of the vast majority of available desktop and laptop computers.
From the Fedora project they encourage any developer to follow their example. Anyone can have a digital signature for $ 99, getting the backing of Microsoft. In this way, Fedora does not force its users (I understand programmers and derived distributions), to join the Microsoft program, since they can use their own keys at a slightly higher cost.
Microsoft's program is the avenue they have chosen for official Fedora distributions, but they will also provide services and support for those users who wish to work with their own self-generated digital signatures.
Although this solution is partially to the satisfaction of the FSF, since it is in accordance with its principles, it is not exempt from criticism since it would be necessary to pay for the digital signature and for this reason they reject the recommendation to join the Microsoft certification program.
The Ubuntu solution versus Secure Boot I have already explained in Another item. The FSF does not like Canonical's solution of leaving GRUB out of the secure boot system (due to a problem with the GPLv3 license), and replacing it with another boot loader.
The FSF understands that Canonical has misunderstood GPLv3 and their fear of violating the license is unfounded. They also believe that the weaker license of the alternate bootloader detracts from the user's freedom. Finally they criticize Canonical for not having had any contact with the FSF to discuss the issue.
For more information, I recommend you read the document prepared by the FSF.
Source: Engadget
Sure, then I mentioned another distro that is not Ubuntu that has Unity, according to what Unity only works in Ubuntu because of the dependencies and a lot of other things, there was a project to port it to fedora but it seems that it got thrown, anyway options to Unity are unnecessary.
So to use Unity you must use ubuntu…. then it does not work in other distros, therefore Unity only contributes to Ubuntu (pure selfishness they want others to help them but they do not give back) and it does not directly contribute to other projects even gnome (unity uses gnome) perhaps we see unity innovations put into march in gnome? that's because Unity is for Ubuntu nothing else!
Or rather to one, how many lines of kernell does canonical contribute to Linux?
How many projects have you left or created canonical, for the world? Note that I mean own has not borrowed or borrowed ...
Although Unity is Open Source, only Ubuntu is using it, because Canonical has not put installation packages for the other distros so that unity can be installed on other Linux OS.
Look at this, because this is what the internet is for! 😛
http://www.javipas.com/2012/01/31/unity-es-open-source-por-que-nadie-mas-que-ubuntu-la-usa/
http://www.muylinux.com/2012/03/30/reniega-ubuntu-de-linux-o-es-solo-una-estrategia-comercial/
http://www.muylinux.com/2012/04/19/red-hat-y-canonical-enfrentadas/
Can you tell what the hell I said so that my comment is deleted? Others can offend but I can't say a single word whatever it is?
I already told you once, if you want me to leave, tell me and I will leave
@ 4f7e5e3f01752f9dde845f08fafce6ac For people like you there are few linux users.
People like you who despise and offend others by not using Ubuntu at all
@ 4f7e5e3f01752f9dde845f08fafce6ac People like you are what make Linux userless.
Winbuntosos like you, who always offend or with an incredible arrogance despise others (as is your case)
This means that the GNU / Linux cake is shared by a couple, and Microsof also wins from this distribution.
HAHAHA Courage never miss a chance to spit on Canosof
Or also what Canoni $ oft does
If you can not beat them, join him
Typical Winbuntu user who is completely blinded and can't stand someone not liking his district or disagreeing with Canoni $ oft.
Tolerate a little the ideas of the other winbuntosete, because the comrade has told the truth, in a clean way Unity only works in your beloved district
Unity only works with Ubuntu ???. Please, we are on the internet, do not make your ignorance public. Between this comment and the one below that says that Canonical is in league with Microsoft, every day I am more than happy to at least know how to do the O with a joint, because there are so many people who don't know how to do even that….
!!! Divide and you will triumph !!! an old old way of doing politics in North America… !!!
I agree, Canonical does not contribute to the community, it takes the best projects, includes them in Ubuntu (as if it were an honor) and then it makes the profits from those projects, without investing a penny in the projects.
The only thing Canonical has created is unity and it only works in Ubuntu, that is a clear example of how it does not help or give back to the community.
+1
Canoni $ oft here makes things more difficult, so they are more proof that they are in cahoots with Microsoft
I know I will be highly criticized for this, but I always said it and I maintain it: «Canonical is a LEECHER, who only absorbs without contributing practically anything to the community»
I do not agree. Microsoft has always tried over the years to extinguish linuxers ... so many years. Because if people even found out that there are other systems they would immediately change.