1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Controversial Windows 8 Secure Boot Feature: FSF Issues Rallying Cry

Discussion in 'News' started by qubit, Oct 26, 2011.

  1. Derek12

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,096 (0.65/day)
    Thanks Received:
    163
    But would this affect to BIOS based computers or only for UEFI ones? This wasn't me clear :confused:, or would Windows 8 ban BIOS computers?
  2. qubit

    qubit Overclocked quantum bit

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    Messages:
    9,821 (3.99/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,480
    Only UEFI implements secure boot. I would expect Windows 8 will install on old machines though, or Microsoft would leave itself with a tiny little market to sell the operating system into.
    Derek12 says thanks.
  3. micropage7

    micropage7

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2010
    Messages:
    5,732 (3.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,316
    Location:
    Jakarta, Indonesia
    so m$ think coz they own the market what they do the market will follow and say yes?
    like titanic that said unsinkable but history prove it
    just lets see...
  4. pr0n Inspector

    pr0n Inspector

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2008
    Messages:
    1,334 (0.64/day)
    Thanks Received:
    164
    When you guys say "signed", do you mean the bootloader or the petition? (hah!)
  5. qubit

    qubit Overclocked quantum bit

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    Messages:
    9,821 (3.99/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,480
    I was nearly gonna answer that. :wtf: :laugh:
  6. Bo$$

    Bo$$ Lab Extraordinaire

    Joined:
    May 7, 2009
    Messages:
    5,307 (2.73/day)
    Thanks Received:
    867
    Location:
    London, UK
    ah, they are taking the apple route....
  7. pantherx12

    pantherx12 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Messages:
    9,714 (4.70/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,699
    Location:
    ENGLAND-LAND-LAND
    Wait wait wait, so how can windows 8 effect what the motherboard is doing during boot up?


    This won't be able to stop people installing linux at all I'm so confussed :S
  8. digibucc

    digibucc

    Joined:
    May 21, 2009
    Messages:
    4,914 (2.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,491
    restricted boot only allows signed executables to boot, most linux distros will not be signed on every release, so if restricted boot is enabled, only signed linux installs will work. there will be some,. but it will greatly limit the control you have over our own machine (if it is implemented wrong).
  9. tomkaten

    tomkaten

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2007
    Messages:
    69 (0.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5
    It's Microsoft. If something can go wrong it will go wrong. I'm sick of "features" designed to help the users in their first two iterations and horrifyingly restrictive after the initial public protests. So I signed it as well.
    qubit says thanks.
  10. Kreij

    Kreij Senior Monkey Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    13,881 (5.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5,615
    Location:
    Cheeseland (Wisconsin, USA)
    A signed bootloader/kernel is not enough. The firmware on the mobo must be aware of the signed executable too (it's key). This means that if the OEM did not include keys for a given OS, it will not work. Period. If I write a bootloader and kernel and want to test to see if it works with this option, I can't even if I self-sign it.

    Let's say that you are happily running (legit) Windows and some malware (ie. rootkit) infects your bootloader.
    It would seem that from that point on, your system will no longer boot at all, and force a complete wipe and reload of the OS. While that is probably what you would do in the event of a bootloader compromise, it's really going to put non-technical people in a panic situation.

    I like the idea in concept, but the execution leaves quite a few questions unanswered (at least for now).
  11. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,150 (11.66/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,474
    kreij: they'll just put a repair tool for the bootloader on the installation DVD, like they already have now for other repair functions.
  12. Kreij

    Kreij Senior Monkey Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    13,881 (5.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5,615
    Location:
    Cheeseland (Wisconsin, USA)
    That sort of fixes one of the problems, but what about the OEM systems that do not come with installation disks and require you make your own (which many, many people completely overlook)?
  13. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,150 (11.66/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,474
    as always, they'll expect you to take it back to where you bought it for repairs. (in reality, they take it to that family friend who "can fix these stupid things")
    tomkaten and digibucc say thanks.
  14. Kreij

    Kreij Senior Monkey Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    13,881 (5.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5,615
    Location:
    Cheeseland (Wisconsin, USA)
    I agree with that, Mussels, as most of us fall into the category of someone who "can fix these stupid things".
    I just wonder how many people will just shut off the option, hand the computer back and say "fixed" even though the bootloader is still compromised.

    I just can't help but feel that there is a better way to do this.
  15. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,150 (11.66/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,474
    all microsoft really want is to block OEM machines from pirating newer OS's. they dont give a shit about custom builds. this is a piracy fix for prebuilt machines, especially laptops and tablets and nothing else.
    tomkaten says thanks.
  16. [H]@RD5TUFF

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2009
    Messages:
    5,615 (3.20/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,707
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    signed
    qubit says thanks.
  17. laszlo

    laszlo

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    891 (0.25/day)
    Thanks Received:
    105
    Location:
    66 feet from the ground
    qubit since you star posting news& "editorials" i felt like tpu gained "virility" ; i must admit that slowly get bored by all the hardware news,test,benches etc...life is not all about hardware & tech and i think is good having more infos from all domain in pc area and related ones

    keep up the good work and don't give a s..it about critics;those who criticize you read what you post so they're readers even they want or not.

    only good work is criticized bad is almost never mentioned
    qubit says thanks.
  18. qubit

    qubit Overclocked quantum bit

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    Messages:
    9,821 (3.99/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,480
    Thankyou very much! :toast: I'm glad to be making a positive difference to TPU. :)
  19. [H]@RD5TUFF

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2009
    Messages:
    5,615 (3.20/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,707
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Everyone should sign this regardless of your OS choice, being forced into having to use only 1 OS to "fight piracy" is a terrible thing!
    qubit says thanks.
  20. fusionblu

    fusionblu

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2010
    Messages:
    282 (0.20/day)
    Thanks Received:
    39
    Location:
    London, England, UK
    So this is the reason Microsoft is releasing a new OS so soon than rather let Windows 7 have a long life span. I thought the release of a new OS this soon was suspicious since there are not as many serious faults with Windows 7 as there were with Windows Vista, but it would appear that this Restrict-Boot is the only option Microsoft have to fight the rather helpful SLIC Activation Loader which is used my millions of people worldwide. :D

    I guess this won't matter much as an alternative crack would eventually be made if this "feature" (as Microsoft might like to call it) were to be implemented into all motherboards as piracy is always inevitable when a product is released regardless of any anti-piracy methods that may have been put in. :nutkick:

    I think it would be safe to say that when the "Secure-Boot" is bypassed it would only become an unnecessary "feature" that motherboard manufacturers would eventually get rid off, but let's hope that it would fail before it can be used so it won't interfere with the hardware and software that has yet to be released.
  21. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,150 (11.66/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,474
    fusionblu: or maybe microsoft always released OS's this fast in the past?


    95/98/98SE/ME/NT/2000/XP/XP MCE/XP 64/vista/7 ?
  22. fusionblu

    fusionblu

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2010
    Messages:
    282 (0.20/day)
    Thanks Received:
    39
    Location:
    London, England, UK
    I suppose that part could be true, but from how far they've gone it's clear that the new release is mostly about the anti-piracy and not as an actual improvement, that much is clear.
  23. newtekie1

    newtekie1 Semi-Retired Folder

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,839 (6.19/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5,944
    Clear? Not really, I think there are more improvements between Win8 and Win7 then there were between Win7 and Vista. Vista didn't really have that many problems by the time Win7 was released, SP1 and SP2 made sure of that.
    Crunching for Team TPU More than 25k PPD
  24. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept "I go fast!1!11!1!"

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    13,456 (6.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,420
    Location:
    IA, USA
    There's nothing to stop malware from getting signed. e.g. most Adobe and Apple software.

    I've never encountered a malicious boot anyway unless UEFI is extremely vulnerable to such things. I haven't used a UEFI system yet.
    Crunching for Team TPU
  25. newtekie1

    newtekie1 Semi-Retired Folder

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,839 (6.19/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5,944
    Well UEFI is far more capable when it comes to network booting, so one of the main concerns that people voiced about it was that malicous booting was a larger concern due to the better network booting support. Secure Boot is one of the ideas to help close those holes created by the network booting improvements.
    Crunching for Team TPU More than 25k PPD

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page