Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 15 Jun 2012 02:23:29 +0200
From:      "C. P. Ghost" <cpghost@cordula.ws>
To:        grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: UEFI Secure Boot Specs - And some sanity
Message-ID:  <CADGWnjU3qkSKGWDUjGwroXXLd_=auWvmfWKy%2B8kqzj5r2oGmeg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAD2Ti29q6ij5Xht587_7gmDs%2BsWfStST=4C5abiF=Cg7FXi%2Byg@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <CAD2Ti2_SHrW5U3FM5FDuuddkBijKs_z%2BnsaViQBT6uF9X3b8Eg@mail.gmail.com> <201206081611.q58GBW0J097808@fire.js.berklix.net> <CAD2Ti29q6ij5Xht587_7gmDs%2BsWfStST=4C5abiF=Cg7FXi%2Byg@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 12:17 AM, grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com> wrote:
> I did say "effectively". If people would actually read that chapter
> in the spec (minimally 27.5) they would find that they can:
> - Load a new PK without asking if in default SetupMode
> - If not in SetupMode, chainload a new PK provided it is
> signed by the current PK.
> - Clear the PK in a 'secure platform specific method'.

Only if they fully follow the spec. This is rather unlikely.

Even today, there are still many broken DMI/SMBIOS
tables out there that contain barely enough stuff for
Windows to boot successfully. What makes you think
UEFI BIOS makers will go all the trouble to implement
such a complex spec, if all they have to do is to ensure
compliance with MS requirements?

I wouldn't count on an option or switch to override this
system.

Technically, we may very well have to replace the BIOS,
or even the BIOS chip itself (that'll be fun if it is physically
mounted on the board!), and replace it with a chip flashed
with a free BIOS.

And by then, the corps who are responsible for this UEFI
mess will have made it illegal to
  1. tinker with your own hardware, as it would be DRM circumvention
and
  2. implement a free UEFI BIOS as it would violate some UEFI patents.

Basically, we may end up in a situation where running FreeBSD
on a modified motherboard could be outright illegal. Which is
exactly the point, isn't it?

-cpghost.

-- 
Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CADGWnjU3qkSKGWDUjGwroXXLd_=auWvmfWKy%2B8kqzj5r2oGmeg>