Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: FastCoyote
Am I being paranoid or is this another Microsoft rules the world scheme?

While I can be as paranoid as the next guy, the article states:

Secure boot is designed to protect against malware code running before the operating system. This isn't a hypothetical threat. Pre-boot malware exists in the wild, and some of it is nastier than you expect. So obviously bootloaders need to be signed, since otherwise you'd just replace the signed bootloader with an unsigned one that installed malware and booted your OS.

6 posted on 05/31/2012 12:09:51 PM PDT by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: ShadowAce

The ‘Flame’ stuff scared me. Since I’m not doing IT 24/7 like I used to, am I going to be able to easily get boxes that aren’t Microsoft signed, or will you be forced to pay a $99 Microsoft tax every time you reconfigure a box?


7 posted on 05/31/2012 12:47:48 PM PDT by FastCoyote (I am intolerant of the intolerable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson