[jtsagata]

Do we really need UEFI? I believe that there is simpler ways to achieve this. For example:

a. User turn ON a switch to enter "OS Install mode"

b. User install the OS of his choice. During installation the installer read a motherboard specific key from the BIOS and sign his bootloader/kernel/drivers using that key.

c. User turn OFF the "OS installation switch". System is save (at least as long as the OS in choice is not a Redmnond one)

Is there any fundamental problems with this approach?

[wtracy]

It seems that UEFI is supposed to protect against malicious actors who have physical access to your machine.

Of course, you're also assuming that securing the end-user is the actual goal of UEFI. ;-) I can see legitimate situations where a corporation would want to ensure that their employees aren't tampering with their hardware.

Of course, I think it's fairly obvious by now that one of the main reasons that MS is pushing UEFI at this point is to prevent Android from being installed on "Windows" hardware.

[jtsagata]

If someone have physical access to my machine he/she can install keys if the BIOS supports that anyway. And even if it doesn't i have many more things to worry anyway. UEFI don't protect me from stealing the machine or the HD data or installing mallicius software.

Of course, i totally agree with you on that the reall reasons is for MS and hardware manufactures is trying to control MY hardware.