Secure Boot complaint filed against Microsoft


Recommended Posts

I still haven't seen an example.

I had a friend bring me his All in one with Windows 8

Acer Aspire AZS600-UR15

and wanted me to install Windows 7 on it- there was no option to turn off the check.

Windows 7 would pretend like it would install then at the point of installing boot loader - Fail- even when I placed a fresh drive int the machine.

It would not let it write to the boot sector.

I looked and there was nothing -- the only options were - to control boot order- check for extra hard drives and turn to compatibility mode.

I had to end up restoring the Windows 8.

No this has nothing to do with LINUX not being good but Microsoft forcing Windows 8 on you....

I mean let me take Linux out of the equation for you.

Windows 8 runs like a snail or you just don't like it and you decide you want to buy and install Windows 7 instead

Whoops Not GOING TO ALLOW IT...

. you can't because the only OS your computer thinks is a Valid install is Windows 8.

And in some of the OEM's there is no bios option to remove or disable this check.

The easy way to edit this is allow the OEM's to have a bios that can be downloaded to allow people to turn it off.

What this boils down to is Allow the user the choice.

What a non argument!

A non-techie user will be content with latest Windows.

A techie user on the other hand should know better.

You have the choice either buy from a large company or build it yourself and install whatever you want on it.

What a non argument!

A non-techie user will be content with latest Windows.

A techie user on the other hand should know better.

You have the choice either buy from a large company or build it yourself and install whatever you want on it.

So a user should be content with a system that lags? then? And they want to run a lower OS? - Priceless-

And upgrade of processor is not a valid option since it is a cpu/gpu built into an all in one .

Or you should be stuck with something they don't like then?

Probably because theoretically, They are knocking at the door and microsoft is behind the locked door giggling while Linux users scratch their heads.

it's abuse of a monopoly by locking out the competition from even experimenting with alternatives.

Acer- Emachine - Gateway to name a few... There is no option to disable it at all-- it is missing.

Microsoft REQUIRES that all x86/x86-64 machines have the option to turn off Secure Boot...

I had a friend bring me his All in one with Windows 8

Acer Aspire AZS600-UR15

and wanted me to install Windows 7 on it- there was no option to turn off the check.

Windows 7 would pretend like it would install then at the point of installing boot loader - Fail- even when I placed a fresh drive int the machine.

It would not let it write to the boot sector.

I looked and there was nothing -- the only options were - to control boot order- check for extra hard drives and turn to compatibility mode.

I had to end up restoring the Windows 8.

Secure Boot was obviously disabled.

It shouldn't even let you boot from a DVD if Secure Boot is enabled.

Compatibility mode? Perhaps they're calling it that? By the way, Secure Boot doesn't prevent the writing of the boot sector, I don't think. I think it only prevents booting from a boot sector that doesn't have a valid certificate stored in the UEFI. I think. So if malware overwrites it, you will be blocked from booting... and will have to run the recovery DVD to re-write the boot sector.

Hello,

Can you please list the brands and models of computers that vendors have shipped that have Windows 8 preloaded and no option to disable UEFI Secure Boot in their firmware? Please note that by computer, I mean an IA-32 instruction set compatible CPU such as those made by AMD or Intel, and not tablet devices with ARM CPUs that run Windows RT. Thank you.

Regards,

Aryeh Goretsky

No this has nothing to do with LINUX not being good but Microsoft forcing Windows 8 on you....

I mean let me take Linux out of the equation for you.

Windows 8 runs like a snail or you just don't like it and you decide you want to buy and install Windows 7 instead

Whoops Not GOING TO ALLOW IT...

. you can't because the only OS your computer thinks is a Valid install is Windows 8.

And in some of the OEM's there is no bios option to remove or disable this check.

The easy way to edit this is allow the OEM's to have a bios that can be downloaded to allow people to turn it off.

What this boils down to is Allow the user the choice.

I mean what if people buy a PC with Windows 8 and decide they don't like it at all... and they want to install the following.

Windows 7

Linux

Hackintosh

But their computer won't allow them to do this.

This is as they are trying to show is the same option as Microsoft locking people into having IE installed by default.

The other thing to look at is -- people say "BUY a Linux Computer" well that limits the choices and those choices are not very strong computers.

Other than -

https://www.system76.com

But still there are not a lot of options- They don't even offer any AMD chip-sets.

Some of these people don't mind paying for a computer with Windows but also like the CHOICE to have a dual boot as well.

I mean would you want a computer where you can't even choose which OS you want on it?

I can't see this going anywhere, Microsoft aren't locking anybody out, the Linux guys can sign their own releases (Or they can do what Red Hat tried to do, and patch the kernel to read the signed binary MS provides), or they can simply turn it off (I can't even enable it on my PC since my GFX card isn't up to spec, Windows 8 doesn't have an issue with it)

...

Compatibility mode? Perhaps they're calling it that? By the way, Secure Boot doesn't prevent the writing of the boot sector, I don't think. I think it only prevents booting from a boot sector that doesn't have a valid certificate stored in the UEFI. I think. So if malware overwrites it, you will be blocked from booting... and will have to run the recovery DVD to re-write the boot sector.

"Compatibility Mode" (Or Compatibility Support Module) is the UEFI name for "BIOS", great isn't it? Turning that option on causes it to boot the the classic BIOS method and disables any nice functionality UEFI provides (like Secure Boot)

Microsoft forcing Windows 8 on you....

You do know that Microsoft REQUIRES that secure boot can be disabled, right? Microsoft isn't doing ****. You're a god damn idiot. Stop blabbering bull****.

I had a friend bring me his All in one with Windows 8

Acer Aspire AZS600-UR15

ZCyb479.png

Funny... I was able to find it in the manual.

https://mega.co.nz/#!VkFRXaAT!LLt1iRqH54ssGoLDI_tvIggvWulOt87OZUTc7T7DWOU

  • Like 2

I can't see this going anywhere, Microsoft aren't locking anybody out, the Linux guys can sign their own releases (Or they can do what Red Hat tried to do, and patch the kernel to read the signed binary MS provides), or they can simply turn it off (I can't even enable it on my PC since my GFX card isn't up to spec, Windows 8 doesn't have an issue with it)

"Compatibility Mode" (Or Compatibility Support Module) is the UEFI name for "BIOS", great isn't it? Turning that option on causes it to boot the the classic BIOS method and disables any nice functionality UEFI provides (like Secure Boot)

Actually that option listed turned the SATA drive as an ATA drive when choosing Compatibility mode.

It would boot the Windows 7 DVD but when it went to write to the Drive that was when it failed.

There was no listed option to turn it off.. the bios options were sparse.

You do know that Microsoft REQUIRES that secure boot can be disabled, right? Microsoft isn't doing ****. You're a god damn idiot. Stop blabbering bull****.

ZCyb479.png

Funny... I was able to find it in the manual.

https://mega.co.nz/#...t87OZUTc7T7DWOU

Seriously There was no Authentication Tab when I was in it-- and I just called the guy and he booted to the bios and it is not there.

There was no listed option to turn it off.. the bios options were sparse.

I don't know, seems like it's pretty obvious to me:

ZCyb479.png

Funny... I was able to find it in the manual.

Seriously There was no Authentication Tab when I was in it-- and I just called the guy and he booted to the bios and it is not there.

Fine, but Microsoft does require that you have the ability to disable it. Your dispute isn't with Microsoft, but with Acer. This isn't an instance of Microsoft being anti-competitive or intentionally locking others out.

I don't know, seems like it's pretty obvious to me:

What bios revision did the screen come from

Fine, but Microsoft does require that you have the ability to disable it. Your dispute isn't with Microsoft, but with Acer. This isn't an instance of Microsoft being anti-competitive or intentionally locking others out.

What bios revision?

the one who need the secure boot most is the corporates environtment,

however current 'secure boot' implementation is less desired

as the fact that key was handled by Microsoft & hardware vendor, and NOT by hardware owner.

If hardware owner can create its own unique keys,

they can sign the OS files with it,

and the computer can only works if it run using said 'apporved' OS,

this is the ideal way of using Secure Boot in corporate environtment.

While in current situation, suppose corporate using secure boot Windows 8,

but employess managed to install some other OS,

because the fact that OS signed with the SAME Key as used by the W8,

the secure boot protocols will accept and run that OS.

From Corporate's security point of view thats are not desireable,

and thus doesn't achieve alleged security that suppose to be delieverd by 'Secure Boot'.

Sure you can disable the Secure Boot,

but can you specify/modify the key? NO. Only hardware vendor can do that.

And if the current Secure Boot's Keys are compromised just like how PlayStation 3's keys was compromised,

that means all existing secure boot can be compromised as the key management was handled by MS & hardware vendor.

...

Sure you can disable the Secure Boot,

but can you specify/modify the key? NO. Only hardware vendor can do that.

...

If it's any good you can, my motherboard lets me install/remove any keys (including the default MS keys)

the one who need the secure boot most is the corporates environtment,

however current 'secure boot' implementation is less desired

as the fact that key was handled by Microsoft & hardware vendor, and NOT by hardware owner.

If hardware owner can create its own unique keys,

they can sign the OS files with it,

and the computer can only works if it run using said 'apporved' OS,

this is the ideal way of using Secure Boot in corporate environtment.

While in current situation, suppose corporate using secure boot Windows 8,

but employess managed to install some other some other OS

because the fact that OS signed with the SAME Key as used by the W8,

the secure boot protocols will accept and run that OS.

From Corporate's security point of view thats are not desireable,

and thus doesn't achieve alleged security that suppose to be delieverd by 'Secure Boot'.

Sure you can disable the Secure Boot,

but can you specify/modify the key? NO. Only hardware vendor can do that.

And if the current Secure Boot's Keys are compromised just like how PlayStation 3's keys was compromised,

that means all existing secure boot can be compromised as the key management was handled by MS & hardware vendor.

Stopped reading at "keys handled by Microsoft".

No they are not. Verisign is handling Secure Boot keys. Microsoft bought they key like everyone else can do, they even offered keys for Linux distros for free for a while but since Linus is too stuck up on his own views it went all sour, this is nothing you can blame MS on.

  • Like 2

the one who need the secure boot most is the corporates environtment,

however current 'secure boot' implementation is less desired

as the fact that key was handled by Microsoft & hardware vendor, and NOT by hardware owner.

If hardware owner can create its own unique keys,

they can sign the OS files with it,

and the computer can only works if it run using said 'apporved' OS,

this is the ideal way of using Secure Boot in corporate environtment.

While in current situation, suppose corporate using secure boot Windows 8,

but employess managed to install some other some other OS

because the fact that OS signed with the SAME Key as used by the W8,

the secure boot protocols will accept and run that OS.

From Corporate's security point of view thats are not desireable,

and thus doesn't achieve alleged security that suppose to be delieverd by 'Secure Boot'.

Sure you can disable the Secure Boot,

but can you specify/modify the key? NO. Only hardware vendor can do that.

And if the current Secure Boot's Keys are compromised just like how PlayStation 3's keys was compromised,

that means all existing secure boot can be compromised as the key management was handled by MS & hardware vendor.

You can load your own signing keys in some implementations..

That is, however, the reason it's set up the way it is. It's beyond confusing for the average user. That's why Microsoft mandated that you be able to turn it off.

If you want secure boot that you hold the keys to, awesome. Find an OEM provider that allows you to, then find a way to sign the MS bootloader and you're in.. You are at best a borderline use case >.<

That explains it. His is 5/22/12 I guess I should email acer for a download of an updated bios.

Why would a computer that shipped with Windows 8... which was released in October 2012... ship with a BIOS revision from May 2012 instead of the more current version from August 2012? Interesting...

And if that's a revision from May 2012, and that was written before Windows 8 was released... why can't you boot Windows 7?

See? Microsoft isn't screwing with you. Acer is.

That explains it. His is 5/22/12 I guess I should email acer for a download of an updated bios.

BIOS updates should be listed on their site download sections as well. At least most OEM's have it this way.

Why would a computer that shipped with Windows 8... which was released in October 2012... ship with a BIOS revision from May 2012 instead of the more current version from August 2012? Interesting...

And if that's a revision from May 2012, and that was written before Windows 8 was released... why can't you boot Windows 7?

See? Microsoft isn't screwing with you. Acer is.

that one was oops a miss typed I am

on my phone.

8/22/12 was what it should have been whichit was September 2012 when he wanted me to put 7 on it... there were no updated bios on their site when I checked that month

If it's any good you can, my motherboard lets me install/remove any keys (including the default MS keys)

whats your motherboard type?

i would like to recommend it to some client,

as most Secure Boot capable motherboard i've seen, doesn't allow you to installing your own keys easily,

some said that user can change the key during Firmware Updates,

which mean the key must be specified somewhere in the firmware binaries!

Stopped reading at "keys handled by Microsoft".

No they are not. Verisign is handling Secure Boot keys. Microsoft bought they key like everyone else can do, they even offered keys for Linux distros for free for a while but since Linus is too stuck up on his own views it went all sour, this is nothing you can blame MS on.

yes, but doesn't change the fact that almost (all?) windows 8 in existance are signed by the very same key, which pose pending problem of key compromise i mentioned above.

And, the corporates actually want to sign the OS they use with their own unique keys,

as that would give them control on what OS allowed to be used in their environtment,

and less likely affected whenever the world-wide Windows-8 Secure Boot keys compromise happens.

but:

then find a way to sign the MS bootloader and you're in..
signing MS OS's component using your own unique keys...,

i read the report that some one did try and of course the Windows 8 was complaining afterward (which is a good thing from OS security's POV btw),

Thats however, unable to achieves what the corporates want.

You can load your own signing keys in some implementations..

That is, however, the reason it's set up the way it is.

It's beyond confusing for the average user. That's why Microsoft mandated that you be able to turn it off.

If you want secure boot that you hold the keys to, awesome. Find an OEM provider that allows you to.

yes, by firmwire updates some OEM did offering that, but it also mean OEM will know the half about the unique key,

some corps would like if if none of the outsider would know about their keys.

And currently, only open-sourced OS (linux flavor for example) components than can easly signed, not Windows 8.

so why Coprs not switch to Linux?

well, due the fact that Corporation still need windows, and OS migration are costly & painful process.

Hello,

Can you please list the brands and models of computers that vendors have shipped that have Windows 8 preloaded and no option to disable UEFI Secure Boot in their firmware? Please note that by computer, I mean an IA-32 instruction set compatible CPU such as those made by AMD or Intel, and not tablet devices with ARM CPUs that run Windows RT. Thank you.

Regards,

Aryeh Goretsky

I think we figured it out...bios needs flahing... his was for august 2012 ... which did not have that as an option... the october bios says that was added.. but when I checked in september there were no bios updates ... which I then gave it back to him.... so there is a fix....problem is on acer

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Dude, im talking about simply disable it from settings app. Because of the eu regulation, you could disable it here for years.
    • One big question about Mars was answered thanks to Einstein's 100 year old theory by Sayan Sen Image via DepositPhotos Scientists at the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have calculated how time passes on Mars compared with Earth, adding detail to how timekeeping would need to work beyond Earth’s orbit. The study, published in The Astronomical Journal, found that clocks on Mars run an average of 477 microseconds, or millionths of a second, faster per day than clocks on Earth. A microsecond is one millionth of a second, a very small unit used in precise scientific timing systems such as atomic clocks, which measure time using consistent atomic behavior. This difference is not constant. Because Mars moves around the Sun in a non-circular path (an eccentric orbit, meaning its distance from the Sun changes over time instead of staying fixed) and is affected by gravity from other bodies, the daily difference can vary by as much as 226 microseconds over a Martian year. The study also identifies smaller repeating changes of about 40 microseconds per day linked to synodic cycles (repeating periods that describe how planets line up with each other as they orbit the Sun from different positions). These longer patterns affect how time differences slowly rise and fall. To make these estimates, researchers compared Mars with Earth and the Moon. The work looks at relativistic proper time (the time actually measured by a clock depending on its speed and the strength of gravity where it is located, as described in Einstein’s relativity). This shows that each world has its own slightly different “rate” of time. This becomes more important as space missions expand into cislunar space (the region between Earth and the Moon) and toward Mars. On Earth, time systems rely on atomic clocks and satellites, which stay closely synchronized for navigation and communication. The study is based on Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, which shows that time is affected by gravity and motion. Stronger gravity makes clocks run slower, while weaker gravity makes them run faster. “The time is just right for the Moon and Mars,” said NIST physicist Bijunath Patla. “This is the closest we have been to realizing the science fiction vision of expanding across the solar system.” A day on Mars is about 40 minutes longer than on Earth, and a Martian year lasts 687 Earth days. But the main question is not just about days and years, but how fast time itself passes. An atomic clock placed on Mars would function normally, but compared with one on Earth, the two would slowly drift apart due to differences in gravity and motion. This requires careful calculation of what is similar to a time-zone difference across planets. Researchers modeled Mars using a reference surface and included gravitational effects from the Sun, Earth, the Moon, and other planets. This includes a multi-body gravitational system (often described as a three-body or four-body problem, where predicting motion becomes difficult because multiple large objects all pull on each other at the same time through gravity). Mars also follows a Keplerian orbit (an idealized elliptical orbit based on simple gravitational laws that assume smooth motion, before adding real-world disturbances from other bodies). In addition, the researchers accounted for solar tides (small changes in gravitational force caused by the Sun that slightly distort planetary motion and timing, especially in systems involving Earth and the Moon). These combined effects are described as relativistic proper-time offsets (small but measurable differences in elapsed time between locations caused by gravity and motion), which must be included when comparing clocks across planets. “But for Mars, that’s not the case. Its distance from the Sun and its eccentric orbit make the variations in time larger. A three-body problem is extremely complicated. Now we’re dealing with four: the Sun, Earth, the Moon and Mars,” Patla explained. “The heavy lifting was more challenging than I initially thought.” Although the differences are extremely small, they matter for navigation and communication systems that depend on precise timing. Even modern networks on Earth, such as mobile systems, rely on timing accuracy at very small fractions of a second. Communication between Earth and Mars currently takes about four to 24 minutes or more depending on planetary positions, meaning signals are not real-time. A shared and accurate time system could help future missions reduce confusion in navigation and data exchange. “If you get synchronization, it will be almost like real-time communication without any loss of information. You don’t have to wait to see what happens,” Patla said. Researchers note that fully developed interplanetary communication networks are still far in the future. However, understanding how time behaves across planets helps prepare for those systems. “It may be decades before the surface of Mars is covered by the tracks of wandering rovers, but it is useful now to study the issues involved in establishing navigation systems on other planets and moons,” said Neil Ashby. “Like current global navigation systems like GPS, these systems will depend on accurate clocks, and the effects on clock rates can be analyzed with the help of Einstein’s general theory of relativity.” Patla added that the results also help improve understanding of time itself under relativity. “It's good to know for the first time what is happening on Mars timewise. Nobody knew that before. It improves our knowledge of the theory itself, the theory of how clocks tick and relativity,” he said. Source: NIST, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 by Razvan Serea TeraCopy is a compact program designed to copy and move files at the maximum possible speed, also providing you with a lot of features. Copy files faster. TeraCopy uses dynamically adjusted buffers to reduce seek times. Asynchronous copy speeds up file transfer between two physical hard drives. Pause and resume transfers. Pause copy process at any time to free up system resources and continue with a single click. Error recovery. In case of copy error, TeraCopy will try several times and in the worse case just skips the file, not terminating the entire transfer. Interactive file list. TeraCopy shows failed file transfers and lets you fix the problem and recopy only problem files. Shell integration. TeraCopy can completely replace Explorer copy and move functions, allowing you work with files as usual. TeraCopy is free for non-commercial use only. For commercial use you need to buy a license. The paid version of the program includes the following features: Copy/move to your favorite folders. Save reports as HTML and CSV files. Select files with the same extension/folder. Remove the selected files from the copy queue. TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 changelog: Added support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. Improved exception handling and automated bug report upload. Fixed several minor bugs and small memory leaks. Build 26 (June 24) Fixed a rare exception when a transfer completed. Features added since version 3.17: Enhanced speed graph. New multi-threaded copy engine. Support for copying to multiple targets. Queue system for managing multiple copy operations. Support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. TeraCopy entry in the modern Windows Explorer context menu. Integrated toolbar in the title bar. Why receive LocalSend transfers with TeraCopy? Handle file conflicts: Skip, overwrite, or rename files when a file with the same name already exists. LocalSend always creates another copy, which can waste time and disk space, especially when resuming an interrupted transfer. Filter unwanted files: Apply ignore lists or remove files manually before accepting a transfer, so unnecessary files are not downloaded. Better performance on fast networks: In tests over a 10 Gbps connection, TeraCopy received files several times faster than the standard LocalSend app on Windows. Download: TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 | 14.5 MB (Freeware, paid upgrade available) View: TeraCopy Website | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Briefly used Turbo Pascal (and Turbo C++) in 97 and soon after that I bought PC magazine that included a full version of Delphi 2. I still use Delphi today, some 29 years later.
    • Age of Empires Mobile comes to PC, here's how to carry over progress from your phone by Ivan Jenic Image: YouTube/Microsoft Microsoft just released Age of Empires Mobile for PC. The game, officially called Age of Empires Mobile: PC Edition, is available for free on Steam and Microsoft Store, almost two years after its initial release for handheld devices. Age of Empires is one of those franchises that entire generations grew up with. The original came out in 1997, and immediately got people hooked to building civilizations and crushing their enemies on the battlefield. However, the franchise today is a far cry from its roots, as Age of Empires Mobile is, well, a game optimized for handheld devices, and not a classic RTS title we’ve all loved for years. And, of course, it includes in-game purchases. The PC version is still a mobile game at its core, but it’s been optimized for desktop play. There’s mouse control, full keyboard compatibility, and a refined UI. Microsoft also refreshed the visuals with some 4k textures, so the game should look better on larger screens. The game supports Crossplay, so you can switch between your phone, tablet, and PC without losing anything. But linked progress doesn’t come out of the box, as you have to enable it first. Here’s how to link your progress: On your mobile device, open Age of Empires Mobile. Go to Settings (Gear icon) > Account. Select Bind Account and choose a sign-in option. Once you enable account binding, sign in on PC using the same method, and your progress will be accessible across all your devices. Xbox Game Pass subscribers also get a bonus reward pack on PC, which includes: 1 Monthly Pass Token 1 Custom Resource Chest 10 Universal 60-Minute Speed-Ups 1,000 Empire Coins Exclusive Player Portrait Frame You can find more info about Age of Empires Mobile: PC Edition, as well as download links, on the Age of Empires official website.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Rookie
      +ChiefOfNeo went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      458
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      79
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!