4·
9 days agoThe article is from a security researcher involved in the development of post-quantum encryption. Hes known for fighting against various agencies trying to weaken encryption for their questionable benefit. Hes been very successful but a one-man-show only goes so far. Please, if you read this: write those emails to the mailing list and tell others whats going on!
This (sadly) has implications across the whole world, but right now its very easy to stop.
And please, if you do write the email, please dont just copy paste the template in the article, it seems the comitee wants to ignore all the ones with the same wording because of “spam”
Its not a backdoor, because secure boot was never about safety to begin with. Its just a piece of security theater, whose primary use is more control for microsoft. “Secure” boot only boots software signed with a microsoft key, thats the “security”. Microsoft also allows linux distributions to be signed, but nothing is technically stopping them from just refusing, for " security reasons", and on some systems secure boot cant be turned off. So it being bustable is a good thing. There are other ways to protect devices from physical access, but generally, if attackers have physical access to your computer, then its compromised, secure boot or not. Framework just didnt want to play along.