戴尔、惠普回应Secure Boot事件

为什么80%的码农都做不了架构师？>>>

一个在操作系统界——尤其是Linux界——重大的问题——微软 要求所有Windows 8机器必须支持UEFI的Secure Boot（安全启动），而并没有要求OEM厂商实现其禁用功能。这引起了Linux界 不小的忧虑；考虑到微软过去的和当前的业务行径，以及OEM的不作为，这不是杞人忧天。CNet的Ed Bott决定 迫使OEM厂商直面这些问题。戴尔表示，它有计划设置包含禁用Secure Boot的选项；然而惠普对这一问题有点含糊其词。

（正文略，欢迎跟帖讨论！）


Secure boot option in a Windows 8 developer tablet
Windows 8 开发者平板电脑安全启动选项


转载请注明：Linux人社区> 英文资讯翻译专版.编译

英文原文：
Dell, HP Respond to Secure Boot Issue
posted by Thom Holwerda on Thu 3rd Nov 2011 19:34 UTC, submitted by lucas_maximus
A big issue right now in the world of operating systems - especially Linux - is Microsoft's requirement that all Windows 8 machines ship with UEFI's secure boot enabled, with no requirement that OEMs implement it so users can turn it off. This has caused some concern in the Linux world, and considering Microsoft's past and current business practices and the incompetence of OEMs, that's not unwarranted. CNet's Ed Bott decided to pose the issue to OEMs. Dell stated is has plans to include the option to turn secure boot off, while HP was a bit more vague about the issue.

Ed Bott contacted HP and Dell, and while his report is a bit abrasive, the gist of the matter is this. Dell confirmed that they have plans to ship Windows 8 machines with the ability to turn secure boot off in UEFI, while HP had no idea what was going on. BIOS maker AMI, meanwhile, has said it will advise OEMs to not remove the option, but adds that they can't mandate as such.

A Dell spokesperson told Bott that "Dell has plans to make SecureBoot an enable/disable option in BIOS setup". Dell plans to move to UEFI with secure boot in the Windows 8 time frame. Unlike how Bott presents it, 'having plans' is of course far from a definitive promise - but at least it's somewhat reassuring.

HP, sadly, was less clear. "HP will continue to offer its customers a choice of operating systems," HP told Bott, "We are working with industry partners to evaluate the options that will best serve our customers." Nobody at HP was apparently even aware of the issue, which means this is a general PR statement with zero actual value.

Lastly, BIOS maker AMI stated that it "will advise OEMs to provide a default configuration that allows users to enable/disable secure boot, but it remains the choice of the OEM to do (or not do) so". This is entirely reasonable - AMI just provides a software package, it doesn't control what OEMs remove and include.

None of this is the reassuring words Bott makes them out to be. There are no promises, no assurances, nothing. My biggest fear is that like with BIOS today, every computer - even revisions within the same model - will have its own unique UEFI implementation, some of them broken and/or limited, without any means of telling which features are supported and implemented and which aren't. Heck, I've encountered countless BIOS implementations over the years which only allowed you to change the boot drive order, and nothing else.

All in all, this issue is far from over, and what Bott has presented us with so far is by no means the smoking gun. Considering Microsoft's history of anti-competitive practices, its current patent troll behaviour, and the general incompetence of OEMs, it's entirely reasonable and smart for us geeks to be on our toes.   

转载于:https://my.oschina.net/xyxzfj/blog/34543