Proving Yet Again That Techrights Was Right About UEFI 'Secure Boot' All Along (Since 2012)
'Secure Boot' or 'secure' boot is about anything but security
A LOT of articles that you saw in recent days about "Linux" and "security" are wrong. Yes, there's some "grain of truth" in them, but UEFI is not Linux, 'secure' boot isn't about security (it's about Microsoft being in control of physical computers irrespective of what operating system they run), and for merely having the audacity to point this out - as we've done for nearly 13 years already - you'd receive constant harassment and abuse by Microsofters (eventually we had to sue them for this harassment [1, 2], on top of many police reports we had filed).
To avoid replicating or spreading the latest FUD, we've carefully offloaded all of it to this page that's still being updated, containing more than a dozen pieces about it - FUD pieces that have become visible as "news" with "Linux" in their headline. Singling out this one example, an associate emphasises that "UEFI is /not/ Linux", so it would be wrong to frame it like that. Even the British media did this, so the associate thought it was time for an I-told-you-so style article and bibliographic review of warnings. Remember that months ago 'secure' boot was deliberately or inadvertently weaponised by Microsoft to prevent PCs that ran GNU/Linux from even booting. We very well know who's responsible for this, i.e. who helped promote this and still does so.
The British publisher says "the finding suggests work is being done to target a broader set of potential targets and dispels the previous thinking that UEFI bootkits are designed for Windows systems only."
That's missing the point entirely! They cite a Microsoft partner and promote the talking point that whatever security problems Windows has, Linux has those too.
Pushers of UEFI 'secure' boot have long promoted this lie and they're Microsofters. The serial strangler from Microsoft calls one of them "former Microsoft researcher" (in his latest blog post) and they work together to silence and terrorise critics of UEFI 'secure' boot. Just follow the money; they are swimming with the Microsoft shark.
Regarding security, I recently said that Microsoft "ALWAYS has holes, even after patching [and] it's in Snowden docs" (also citing cautionary tales from 2016).
CALEA and CALEA2 then came up. The insecurity is part of the actual design. Put another way, insecurity is the goal, so they have compromised everything, now they blame Russia, China etc. Yes, they made insecurity the "standard" and real security a "relative" thing. Then, as the associate put it, "the 'Microsoft effect' [is] where all computers are insecure at one level or another so therefore one must stay with Microsoft (ignoring the difference in the scale and scope of the holes)." That's what ESET is trying to tell us right now. █
