From: stryder@telenet.be.invalid   
      
   On Monday 04 February 2013 22:53, Bobbie Sellers conveyed the following   
   to alt.os.linux.mandriva...   
      
   > UEFI with Secure Boot does solve three security problems.   
   > 1) the danger of Microsoft losing market share.   
   > That is the big reason.   
      
   I would say that this is the /only/ reason, and that the other reasons   
   cited by the proponents of UEFI are in fact just a spin.   
      
   > 2) the danger of technical personnel losing money repairing   
   > computer that Windows users have let go to hell.  Maybe these guys   
   > have complained to MS or Intel?   
      
   No, not a chance.  But you have to look at the bigger picture.   
   Microsoft, Intel, Hewlett-Packard and others have already been in this   
   boat for much longer.  Look up on the "Trusted Computing Platform".   
      
   It's the age-old "problem, reaction, solution" approach to pushing an   
   agenda.  Create a problem by way of a proxy, await the reaction from the   
   public, and then step up to offer "the solution".  Governments do it,   
   and corporations do it.   
      
   > 3) the danger that a private someone with a Linux boot-disk   
   > of several distribution accessing another Linux or other x86 machine   
   > for their private enrichment and impoverishing the user of said   
   > machine.   
   > Note that I say private person.  Forensic and Government   
   > snoops will have no problems with getting the disks they need   
   > to invade our privacy.   
      
   And that latter statement is exactly what nullifies the first one,   
   Bobbie.  Government and/or law enforcement will always require a back   
   door which allows them to snoop, so it's pretty pointless to advertise a   
   security system with titanium bolts on your front door if you're going   
   to have to leave the back door open. ;-)   
      
   > [UEFI, ed.] is meant to take control of your wallet dump your   
   > money right to Microsoft.   
      
   It's not about the money, Bobbie.  Microsoft already has way more money   
   than they could ever spend.   
      
   It's about power, both legal and technical.  It's about the monopoly,   
   the pushing of an inherently flawed-by-design operating system   
   completely owned and controlled by Microsoft - which gives them legal   
   leverage over what you can and can't do with your own computer - and   
   sufficiently flawed to...   
      
     a) keep the anti-virus/anti-malware industry - a sector which   
        Microsoft itself has by now also already ventured into - in the   
        running; and...   
      
     b) offer both governments and criminals a way to exploit the IT   
        infrastructure - i.e. Microsoft plays ball with DARPA and other   
        alphabet soup agencies for cyberwarfare by way of botnets, as well   
        as offering shady organizations a means to conduct their cyber-   
        terrorism.   
      
   It's not difficult to understand.  There's a war going on between good   
   and evil, and Microsoft is simply providing for the battlefield - or   
   stadium, if you will - for a small fee to both parties, so that they can   
   manipulate the outcome of that war as Microsoft sees fit.   
      
   Think of it like of an arms dealer, or if you will, a major bank.  They   
   supply their wares (or their financial sponsoring) to both the criminals   
   and to the cops, or to both the invaders of a nation and to said   
   nation's defense forces.  It's called hedging. ;-)   
      
   --   
   = Aragorn =   
   (registered GNU/Linux user #223157)   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)