TPM is a dedicated chip or firmware enabling hardware-level security, housing encryption keys, certificates, passwords, and sensitive data, “and shielding them from unauthorized access,” Microsoft senior product manager Steven Hosking wrote last month, declaring TPM 2.0 to be “a non-negotiable standard for the future of Windows.”
There are enough other reasons to switch away from GitHub…
Wouldn’t urging people to stop using windows and instead use Linux be a more appropriate suggestion? Sure, GH is MS, but GH isn’t what is going to allegedly require TPM 2. Are we also supposed to stop playing Xbox because MS owns that too?
Are we also supposed to stop playing Xbox because MS owns that too?
Yes
I agree. People need to stop using GitHub already. Btw, Forgejo will be getting federation with ActivityPub.
I’m so excited for ForgeFed
You can also follow them on Mastodon https://floss.social/@forgefed
That’s fuckin amazing
I’m so tired of projects being like “We’re open-source” and then they’re hosted on GitHub, using Discord and whatever fucking other awful tooling they can get their hands on. Thanks guys. I’ll definitely check out your project, yes.
deleted by creator
how does that make the project any less open-source?
what’s next, shaming project owners for living in a house that they pay for with a corporate job?
we get it, you hate capitalism, but that doesn’t mean other people want to go live in the woods too… gotta be realistic :)
They are still technically open-source. I’m not saying that they’re not. But they’re actively alienating users who want to use open-source, because those users cannot get support, report bugs or contribute to the project without using proprietary software.
How extreme do you have to be to only use websites if they are open source?? That’s roughly 0% of the web.
What? I use Firefox and git to bworse, commend and post issues on open source tools hosted on github.
Just tell me you dislike github (understandable) but not that “those hosted on github” are not open source tools… That depends on the license they are following, not the tools they are using.
And by the way git is open source as well as the browser you need to access github.
I think you are getting way too far.
Said so, I host all my open source code on my private instance of forgejo, which is way more open source than github, but I don’t allow registration (its my private instance, after all) so where do you put me at?
Just to remember that even the GPL v3 doesn’t say you must provide support or a ticketing system.
they’re actively alienating users who want to use open-source, because those users cannot get support, report bugs or contribute to the project without using proprietary software
You can still use their source and software though.
Surely, they have their reasons for choosing GitHub over other alternatives.
I know I do, when I choose GitHub over others. (I’m not choosing Discord though.)
Ewww did you type this on a computer made by BIG TECH? How do you call yourself a supporter of the free world when you’re using tech that had precious metals mined by CHILDREN?!
I’m okay to get downvoted.
But unless the solution provides a easy way to create issues and MRs, has high upstream and I can read the code in a browser, then I’m sticking with GitHub.
I say this as a person who contributes to open source and I absolutely know that if I hate something, I should fix it. But I’m dumb as rocks and I just want to contribute, and GitHub hasn’t Enshittified itself to a point that stops me from doing that. Yes, it’s under Microsoft.
I’ve tried a few others, and I keep going back to GitHub because it has the least barriers of entry. I can contribute, I can get feedback, and I can move on.
There are a few quite good alternatives, like codeberg.org and gitlab. But, im not really disagreeing. Perhaps out of familiarity, GitHub UI/Features is still my favorite.
I agree. But Codeberg is very similar to GitHub. I like it, more than Gitlab.
Gitlab is ok, and Codeberg is getting there.
I think the main thing that keeps me on GitHub is the network effect - all the other projects are there. They also have very generous (basically anti-competitive) free tiers.
Gitlab is fine
TPM is nice and all, but Micro$ encrypts your data without consent or a password. Which is insane.
My backup windows install literall bitlock-ed itself
It is never done without a password.
You are spreading false information. Stop.
You’re wrong, it’s true. installs of Windows 11 automatically have software bitlocker when installed on compatible storage devices. If you don’t sync with a Microsoft account, you are required to manually export the recovery key or risk getting locked out of the system. And you are not told that you need to do so.
But that isn’t what he said. He said that MS encrypts your data without a password. That is not true.
You’re wrong. This can occur when setting up some OEM systems without a Microsoft account or password. Here is a SuperUser post where someone is asking how to deliberately put a disk back into this state. I have personally run into this.
I didnt log in with a microsoft account. I only gave my user password for my account.
This is no longer possible with recent builds of the Win11 installer :(
Damn. My install is older, so I will probably get a second SSD and keep that one forever
Normally, offloading cryptography to a different hardware module could be seen as a good thing — but with nonfree software, it can only spell trouble for the user…
Could someone explain more about this? What about TPM + proprietary OS is bad? What are the risks here?
Here is an (old but updated) article on the topic.
As of 2015, the main method of distributing copies of anything is over the internet, and specifically over the web. Nowadays, the companies that want to impose DRM on the world want it to be enforced by programs that talk to web servers to get copies. This means that they are determined to control your browser as well as your operating system. The way they do this is through “remote attestation”—a facility with which your computer can “attest” to the web server precisely what software it is running, such that there is no way you can disguise it. The software it would attest to would include the web browser (to prove it implements DRM and gives you no way to extract the unencrypted data), the kernel (to prove it gives no way to patch the running browser), the boot software (to prove it gives no way to patch the kernel when starting it), and anything else relating to the security of the DRM companies’ dominion over you.
Under an evil empire, the only crack by which you can reduce its effective power over you is to have a way to hide or disguise what you are doing. In other words, you need a way to lie to the empire’s secret police. “Remote attestation” is a plan to force your computer to tell the truth to a company when its web server asks the computer whether you have liberated it.
[…]
As of 2022, the TPM2, a new “Trusted Platform Module”, really does support remote attestation and can support DRM. The threat I warned about in 2002 has become terrifyingly real.
Remote attestation is actually in use by “Google SafetyNet” (now part of the “Play Integrity API”), which verifies that the Android operating system running in a snoop-phone is an official Google version.
This malicious functionality already makes it impossible to run some bank apps on GrapheneOS, which is a modified version of Android that eliminates some, though not all, of the nonfree software that Android normally contains.
This kind of walled garden where you don’t really control your machine is where MS wants to get, and TPM2 supposedly enables them to do that or is a step in that direction.
Damn. Thanks for the info
This talk doesn’t directly answer your question, but it will help you build a foundation for intelligently understanding the risks from a high level.
IPhones. Think of the freedom of owning an ihpone.
That’s it
It’s just FUD and made up shit. I hate MS as much as anyone else, but the statement is bullshit.
