Linux Foundation vet explains setbacks in getting a Secure Boot key for Windows 8 PCs

[wraggster]

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2012/10/windows-os.jpg (http://www.engadget.com/2012/11/24/linux-foundation-vet-explains-setbacks-in-getting-secure-boot/)Linux (http://www.engadget.com/tag/Linux/) fans wondering why they still don't have a friendly UEFI Secure Boot (http://www.engadget.com/2012/10/13/linux-foundation-proposes-solution-for-uefi/) option for Windows 8 (http://www.engadget.com/2012/10/30/windows-8-review/) PCs won't get a solution in hand this week, but they'll at least get an explanation. The Linux Foundation's (http://www.engadget.com/tag/LinuxFoundation/) primary backer for the alternative OS efforts, Parallels' (http://www.engadget.com/tag/Parallels/) server CTO James Bottomley, has revealed that Microsoft's requirements for signed, Secure Boot (http://www.engadget.com/tag/SecureBoot/)-ready code are tough if developers aren't entirely onboard its train of thought. The Redmond crew demands a paper contract signature (remember those?), agreements on work beyond the relevant software and a packaging process that complicates attempts to use open-source tools. Bottomley has already overcome most of these challenges, although he's still waiting for a Linux Foundation-specific key that should theoretically clear a major hurdle. Whether or not that leads to a remedy in days or weeks is up to Microsoft; in the meantime, we'll take comfort in knowing that a signature is so far a convenience for booting into Linux, rather than a necessity.

http://www.engadget.com/2012/11/24/linux-foundation-vet-explains-setbacks-in-getting-secure-boot/