Comment on The creator of systemd wants your entire system validated by SecureBoot

• FauxLiving@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  What if the thing that you want is to have SecureBoot-enforced hardware attestation?

  source

  • baronvonj@piefed.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    What if it was just an off the cuff joke?

    source

    • FauxLiving@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      This is too many dependent probabilities

      Image

      source
• just_another_person@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  That would be beneficial to users as well. I’m not understanding the downside here.

  source

  • deltaspawn0040@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    Only being able to install “allowed” apps is not great for freedom.

    source

    • just_another_person@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      Not even how that works FFS. You’re not the target audience here.

      Y’all really need to start reading more about things before jumping to ridiculously uninformed conclusions and making comments. My gosh.

      source

      • deltaspawn0040@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        Hey you fucking idiot, iPhones need to be jailbroken for that and Android is about to be locked down so developers will need to identify themselves to Google.

        Get your condescending ass out of my face. I’m not in the damn mood for a random fucking stranger to tell me I’m an idiot for commenting on someone else’s speculation. This is a lot meaner than I normally am, but I happen to be grumpy right now and you don’t matter to me at all, so I will continue on to say: Fuck your unhelpful ass.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • baronvonj@piefed.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    I guess you’re not thinking of “locked down” in terms of independent developers finding the iOS and Android “play by our rules and be distributed thru our app store or we’ll make it hard for users to run your software” to be a barrier to distribution.

    source

    • just_another_person@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      Bruh…that’s not even the point of the company or what he’s talking about. You’re being paranoid, first off.

      Second, you want secure devices? You can’t have that right now with Linux very easily. There is no chain of trust coming from the hardware aside from TPM, which is kind of a joke. This guy wants to make a standard way of certifying a chain of trust which would allow an ecosystem of devices to maintain some semblance of trust amongst itself and other devices. This would make things like networks, edge devices, forward deployed hardware, and running sensitive data in less than secure locations more secure.

      Last, if you’re going to be paranoid, at least educate yourself on the subject. Not a single person who is even vaguely familiar with what this entails is thinking “Oh they’re going to lock all our devices rawrawrawr”. That’s just ridiculous. That could happen now, but…you seeing that out in the components world anywhere? Absolutely not. Because it’s no desirable, and that’s NOT WHAT HES EVEN TALKING ABOUT.

      🤦

      source

      • Brummbaer@pawb.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        Sorry but this whole thing is just snake-oil.

        You can verify and sign your whole trust chain down to the last shared library and it doesn’t matter when you don’t know what the binary blobs on your TPM / CPU / BIOS / NIC are doing.

        The only guarantee to a secure system is openness an all of that signing won’t help you there.

        source

        • -> View More Comments