• anothermember@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    12 hours ago

    They haven’t announced anything other than a vague outline of what they’re trying to solve, it could be implemented in so many ways at this point.

    • ashx64@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      8 hours ago

      It’s not vague at all if you know Poettering and have watched his talks.

      This is about securing the boot chain to ensure the integrity of the OS. Ie, someone hasn’t replaced your GRUB with one that looks exactly the same but secretly records your disk password.

      It does so in a decentralized way, so anything like Play Integrity would not make sense in the slightest. It’s the TPM chip measuring values and ensuring they match previous recorded values (and the values to change, such as after updates, so after updates are run, the expected values are updated). It’s not a Secureboot-like system that would make it more feasible to have a Play Integrity-like system.

    • khorovodoved@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      12 hours ago

      The language used speaks for itself. We already know what “integrity” means in this context.

      the company wants Linux systems to be built so their correctness can be explicitly defined and continuously verified.

      This does not seem vague to me. It explicitly states what they are creating.

      • anothermember@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        But how it’s implemented means everything. Google’s play integrity is corrupting because it’s designed to lock vendors in to Google’s proprietary ecosystem. You’re not getting that from this ‘language’ alone, it could be the case but it’s a massive leap at this point.

        • khorovodoved@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          11 hours ago

          I do not care if it is connected to proprietary ecosystem or not. The freedom to decide what software am I allowed to run on my PC is important for me though. Any system that limits that freedom is evil by definition.

          • anothermember@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            11 hours ago

            The freedom to decide what software am I allowed to run on my PC is important for me though

            I’m right with you there, and it’s proprietary software that threatens that, nothing included in this announcement does though.

            • khorovodoved@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              11 hours ago

              I do not understand where does your optimism come from? In what little that we do know they describe the exact same system using the exact same wording as google. If they mean some other thing then they should spend a couple of hours and describe how is it different. And before that the worst should be assumed. It is to dangerous to treat it in any other way.

              • anothermember@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                10 hours ago

                I don’t like to ever assume negative intent without good evidence. I think I’m taking the neutral rather than optimistic view here. If you want me to speculate whether this new company is good or evil, that would just be my speculation; it would depend how they intend to make money out of it, from my gut instinct I can’t say they give me any specific Google vibes yet.