Microsoft tries to block Linux off Windows 8 PCs

[Ted]

Not sure i understand it.
I can see a company not wanting a rootkit and essentially allowing for a 
insecure boot and  other issues,
I mean  a linux distro could demand this (for valid security reasons) 
and lock out dual boot to windows?
But, is it not the case that this signing issue would not have any 
effect on dual boot from separate drives?
I know at times i have had dual boot be drive based and flipped in bios.
I guess however this would be deemed a hassle to some? Given boot 
priority however, if you
had drive drawers or power switch on drives, you could just dual boot by 
powering off the windows drive (or pop it, or bios change priority),
and then it goes into linux?
So seems to me its hardly a "block", if that was even attempt by MS, but 
rather maybe a slight annoyance at best?

-tl

On 09/21/2011 05:28 PM, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 05:18:46PM -0400, Thomas Milne wrote:
>> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/microsoft-tries-to-block-linux-off-windows-8-pcs/9572?tag=mantle_skin%3Bcontent
> Of course we don't know that yet.  So far it is just speculation.
>
> I do imagine some companies would love a method to prevent their machines
> from having rootkits installed (at least by currently known methods).
>
> Of course given existing windows versions aren't signed, any machine
> that requires this to work, won't work with existing windows versions,
> so the changes of that happening seems pretty slim.
>

--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists