50
I presumed it to be a feature. Yeah. A feature.
this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2026
50 points (94.6% liked)
Technology
43248 readers
131 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
We noticed. That's why we started Heads.
I suspect the headline is incorrect though; likely numerous people knew and were smart enough not to say anything.
Really funny that, the thing Microsoft used to try and ~~prevent people from using Linux~~ secure systems, was broken this entire time due to laziness revolving around ensuring Linux worked via Secure Boot.
I mean, UEFI was broken by design from the get-go. It was entirely designed around Windows and shims were an afterthought once the rest of the industry figured out they'd be fucked if they allowed Microsoft complete control. But they didn't fight for an overhaul because Microsoft got all its OEM and BIOS makers on board.
So shims are the best next thing, and they aren't just about Linux, they're a second PKI layer that allows other entities (than Microsoft) to sign shims. Those entities can be Linux distros but also other OS, software or hardware makers.
Microsoft forgetting to revoke signatures for old shims is orthogonal to the design, but it's also true that it's not a very good design. Again, because it was originally made to only deal with Windows and does not deal well with other stuff. The article goes into some detail about workarounds on top of workarounds.