ksi@koi8.net a écrit :
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Wednesday 24 June 2009 20:59:11 Richard Stallman wrote:
The principal purpose of these products is to restrict the public's freedom. So it is natural that their means involve restricting our freedom too.
it sure is nice to make generalities as it makes your resulting argument so much easier to digest. the companies ive worked with could give two sh*ts about end customers tinkering with their products. they're interested in keeping their product secure from other people in their respective industry and from malicious tampering for regulation/safety purposes.
I would like to add that sometimes regulations EXPLICITELY require secure boot. No product can be approved without it. And this does not have anything to do with public's freedom. Just one example is gambling industry which I happen to work right now. Nobody cares about cloning or public's freedom here. What they care about is that nobody can cheat on those nice shiny machines that sometimes let a lucky person to win a multimillion jackpot.
Please point out precisely the regulations that require secure boot. Should be trivial as regulations are by definition public.
I failed to understand how a secure booted machine can be updated by the manufacturer to fix a bug for example, but not by a customer.
Regards,
Jean-Christian de Rivaz