I dunno about this one chief; call it Microsoft paranoia.
this post was submitted on 22 Mar 2025
72 points (100.0% liked)
Linux
12502 readers
516 users here now
A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)
Also, check out:
Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
One of the better security modules in the kernel was developed by the NSA.
It’s open source software and Microsoft can’t force it in, the open source model will handle this properly.
Okay well, It wouldn't have been the first code blob in the kernel (looking at you HDMI)
How about no? The whole proposal looks shady. Where Microsoft says "trust", I do not.
Every Microsoft idea is always bad for Linux.
it's a trap
Oh geeze, that format drives me nuts. Is there a tldr?
Amigo, it's 5 paragraphs and two of those are a quote.
Oh, there's two different links, the kernel lore one is the one I was complaining about.
Oh, I didn't think to check. Figured they were the same. But yeah, looking at it now it looks rather horrible, doesn't it?
This adds the Hornet Linux Security Module which provides signature
verification of eBPF programs.
did we arrive at the second stage of embrace, extend, extinguish?
No, Microsoft would likely sooner fully adopt the Linux kernel tbh.
It aligns with their software/service as a service model.
My bet is you’ll see a “windows 11” compatible user space running on Linux a la WSL ( LSW? ) in the coming decade.
I know Linux engineers who moved to Microsoft generally for this purpose
that's how the "extinguish" phase start - integrate it closely into your own product, so people use yours instead
Can anyone ELI5 why it's bad? Apart from contributior being Microsoft
Very interesting. I'm sure it will find some consumers for this code, in systems that use codesign.