<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<br>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----<br>
Hash: SHA256<br>
<br>
Dear Supporters,<br>
<br>
* Please join us in signing the statement: /Stand up for your<br>
freedom to install free software/<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot-vs-restricted-boot/statement"><http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot-vs-restricted-boot/statement></a><br>
<br>
The free software movement has come a long way over the past 25+<br>
years. While we still face many challenges ahead for us to create
a<br>
world in which it is normal and expected for computer users to
have<br>
freedom, we have made steady progress. Right now, however, there
is a<br>
potential threat that could put us back years. Microsoft has
announced<br>
that if computer makers wish to distribute machines with the
Windows 8<br>
compatibility logo, they will have to implement a measure called<br>
"Secure Boot."<br>
<br>
When done correctly, "Secure Boot" is designed to protect against<br>
malware by preventing computers from loading unauthorized binary<br>
programs when booting. In practice, this means that computers<br>
implementing it won't boot unauthorized or modified operating
systems.<br>
This could be a feature deserving of the name, as long as the
/user/<br>
is able to authorize the programs she wants to use, so she can run<br>
free software written and modified by herself or people she
trusts.<br>
<br>
However, we are concerned that Microsoft and hardware
manufacturers<br>
will implement these boot restrictions in a way that will prevent<br>
users from booting anything other than unmodified Windows. In this<br>
case, a better name for the technology would be Restricted Boot,
since<br>
such a requirement would be a severe restriction on computer users
and<br>
not a security feature at all.<br>
<br>
We're looking at a world in which it could become impossible for
the<br>
average user to install GNU/Linux on any new computer, so too much
is<br>
at stake for us to wait and see if computer manufacturers will do
the<br>
right thing. "Secure Boot" could all too easily become a euphemism
for<br>
restriction and control by computer makers and Microsoft --
freedom<br>
and security necessitate users being in charge of their own
computers.<br>
<br>
So please, join us in signing this statement against Restricted
Boot,<br>
and consider encouraging your friends, family, and colleagues to
do<br>
the same.<br>
<br>
If you are part of an organization or company that would like to<br>
prominently show their support, please contact us at
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:campaigns@fsf.org">campaigns@fsf.org</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:campaigns@fsf.org"><mailto:campaigns@fsf.org></a>.<br>
<br>
For your convenience, here is a list of additional articles and<br>
resources related to this statement:<br>
<br>
* Public statement:<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot-vs-restricted-boot/statement">http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot-vs-restricted-boot/statement</a><br>
* Press release:<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.fsf.org/news/secure-boot-vs-restricted-boot-in-windows-8">http://www.fsf.org/news/secure-boot-vs-restricted-boot-in-windows-8</a><br>
* Detailed explanation of the issue:<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot-vs-restricted-boot">http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot-vs-restricted-boot</a><br>
<br>
Sincerely,<br>
<br>
John Sullivan<br>
Executive Director<br>
Free Software Foundation<br>
<br>
<br>
- --<br>
Follow us on identi.ca at <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://identi.ca/fsf">http://identi.ca/fsf</a> | Subscribe to our<br>
blogs via RSS at <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://fsf.org/blogs/RSS">http://fsf.org/blogs/RSS</a><br>
Join us as an associate member at <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://fsf.org/jf">http://fsf.org/jf</a><br>
<br>
Sent from the Free Software Foundation,<br>
<br>
51 Franklin Street<br>
Fifth Floor<br>
Boston, MA 02110-1335<br>
United States<br>
<br>
- -- <br>
Lucélio Gomes de Freitas<br>
ETFCSF-> U.G.F.-> P.U.C.(RJ)<br>
Engº, Analista Suporte(Free Mind).<br>
Email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:aa.lucelio@gmail.com">aa.lucelio@gmail.com</a><br>
Tel: 55 0XX 21 85964911<br>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----<br>
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)<br>
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://enigmail.mozdev.org/">http://enigmail.mozdev.org/</a><br>
<br>
iF4EAREIAAYFAk6dzpIACgkQENqGaHfBA/d/0gEAtgxngsxOM6UbJz5YAp+1a/ky<br>
pPwR0r8acc6/ShIFubwBALF0/MYkypmuTIsYKApGAF8JmZAJw+qhSY9DVJHkElWY<br>
=TW53<br>
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>