Yes, surely randoms on Lemmy know better than Microsoft and the NSA in regards to security.
Comment on Secure Boot is completely broken on 200+ models from 5 big device makers
homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 1 month agoTo this day, key players in security—among them Microsoft and the US National Security Agency—regard Secure Boot as an important, if not essential, foundation of trust in securing devices in some of the most critical environments, including in industrial control and enterprise networks.
You dare question a monopoly corporation and the spymasters of this country??
(/s)
capital@lemmy.world 1 month ago
homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Oh anyone who doesn’t trust Microsoft with their life is a complete idiot. And the NSA only illegally spied on everyone until Bush the II made it legal! So of course we should unquestioningly follow their configuration guides. I mean - haha - we don’t wanna get disappeared! Haha ha. Not. Not that that’s ever happened. That we know of. For sure. Probably.
capital@lemmy.world 1 month ago
in regards to security
in regards to security
in regards to security
in regards to security
Just wanted to make sure you saw it this time because you went off on a tangent there.
freeman@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
It doesn’t matter if they know about security (which they do). A burglar could know about locks and home security systems, would you take his advice?
Their positions on security of others is dismissed on grounds of trust not of competence.
Cosmicomical@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Security is the last thing NSA and Micro$oft care about. NSA wants to be sure they can do all they need to with your devices, and M$ just wants to discourage you from switching to linux.
ruse8145@lemmy.sdf.org 1 month ago
This is obviously insane
Cosmicomical@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Lol, if you say so
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
That’s doing a lot of work here.
Yes, it’s important in certain situations, but for consumer devices, it’s just another thing that can go wrong when using alternative operating systems. Regular users don’t have the physical risk these other systems do, and making it more difficult for users to install more secure operating systems goes against the bigger threat.
Linux is compatible with Secure Boot (source: I exclusively run Linux, and use Secure Boot on my systems), but some distros or manufacturers screw it up. For example, Google Pixel devices warn you about alternative ROMs on boot, and this makes GrapheneOS look like sketchy software, when it’s really just AOSP with security patches on top (i.e. more secure than what ships with the device). The boot is still secure, it’s just that the signature doesn’t match what the phone is looking for.
It’s just FUD on consumer devices, but it’s totally valid in other contexts. If I was running a data center or enterprise, you bet I’d make sure everything was protected with secure boot. But if I run into any problems on personal devices, I’m turning it off. Context matters.