←back to thread

268 points tech234a | 5 comments | | HN request time: 0.807s | source
Show context
samiv ◴[] No.43513408[source]
I'm also 100% convinced Microsoft will introduce mandatory code signing at some point and make it so that you can only ever install software from Windows Store.

They are envious of the Google and Apple walled gardens/cashcows and are now determined to turn Windows into one.

Windows is no longer a product for users, the users of Windows are the product for Microsoft to be shoved into the Azure sales funnel.

replies(13): >>43513481 #>>43513509 #>>43513544 #>>43513761 #>>43513801 #>>43513860 #>>43514065 #>>43514218 #>>43514472 #>>43516006 #>>43516046 #>>43529439 #>>43529599 #
grishka ◴[] No.43514218[source]
Mandatory code signing is meaningless without secure boot though, which can't be made mandatory on x86 systems.
replies(4): >>43514480 #>>43514556 #>>43515221 #>>43516349 #
throwaway48476 ◴[] No.43514556[source]
MS's pluton is in every new CPU.
replies(1): >>43515053 #
1. grishka ◴[] No.43515053[source]
And? Just, uh, boot without secure boot and patch things until they work again without enforcing code signing? The only way this sort of thing could be possibly partially enforced is by remote attestation for apps that depend on a server to function. So do what iOS jailbreaks did, except you don't need a vulnerability to start because secure boot will always be optional.
replies(1): >>43518779 #
2. throwaway48476 ◴[] No.43518779[source]
Secure boot will not always remain optional for windows.
replies(1): >>43519155 #
3. grishka ◴[] No.43519155[source]
And how could that possibly be enforced?
replies(1): >>43522235 #
4. throwaway48476 ◴[] No.43522235{3}[source]
Same way it works for anti cheat.
replies(1): >>43523199 #
5. grishka ◴[] No.43523199{4}[source]
The whole point of anti-cheat is to provide some sort of proof to a game server that your client is unmodified. What would be the server in this case?