Most of you, should be familiar by now with the UEFI Secure Boot that Windows 8 will introduce this summer. For the rest, a very simplistic explanation would be:
Windows 8 secure boot will prevent booting operating systems that aren’t signed by a trusted Certificate Authority. A computer with a Windows 8 logo on it, will make Linux installations complicated.
Of course MS states “Secure boot doesn’t “lock out” operating system loaders, but is a policy that allows firmware to validate authenticity of components”
In my opinion an appropriate secure boot should prevent installation of Windows but we won’t blame MS in here. Instead we will lock out MS from our page, we will prevent Internet Explorer from viewing woGue and we have three reasons for it.
1. Because much like MS we also care about the security of our users and IE isn’t a secure web-browser.
2. It is hard to make a page that is compatible with IE because IE isn’t compliant with HTML standards.
3. We will protest against Secure Boot and as MS “tries” to lock out Linux from OEM hardware, so we will lock out MS from Linux pages.
This approach has a disadvantage. What if people won’t be informed about Open Software and use it just because they couldn’t visit OS pages?
We can improve our approach by permitting users to visit our web-page but warn them that they continue with their own risk as they use an untrusted software. MS does this in application installer, so Windows users are familiar with it.
A few months ago, Organizations, Companies and Individuals joined together to protest against SOPA in a unprecedented way in Internet history. I am not trying to compare these two situations, but what if Linux pages would joined for just a day and would lock out IE from viewing them?