Looks like it uses WinDivert as the filtering driver, which says on its site that "Windows Server 2016 systems must have secure boot disabled"; not entirely surprising and a reminder of what a lot of the "security" stuff is really securing.
"prevent injection of a driver that can divert all my shit at the kernel level" is exactly what you want secure boot protecting you from. there is no limitation of user rights because the user can turn it off and/or load their own keys at will.
secure boot fear mongering is bullshit nonsense
No it doesn't. It's merely a convenient excuse to divert attention away from the truth, which is that it prevents users from doing things like defeating DRM and modifying the system to not be so hostile to themselves in other ways.
secure boot fear mongering is bullshit nonsense
Your position is the corporate propaganda.
The only thing Secure Boot is doing here is preventing you from loading a driver not blessed by Microsoft. They would happily bless "a driver that can divert all my shit at the kernel level", but it costs too much for the maintainer of WinDivert.
And HLK is only for device drivers, not for any regular drivers, as far as I know.
The only reason they dominate the PC market share is because their spyware OS is installed by default and people don't go around switching OSes.
An anecdote about security; at my workplace, one of the top 5 security firms in the world, secure boot isn't required nor is MS. Makes you wonder.
I fail to see in any way how preventing the loading of unsigned drivers in the secure boot chain is "vendor lock-in".
Furthermore, that signature does _not_ have to be Microsoft's. You can sign a driver with a private CA and provided that signer is in the trust store, it will be loaded.
>at my workplace, one of the top 5 security firms in the world
Cool, my dad works for Nintendo tho. Agree with other poster, not sure if you even know what Secure Boot is. Seems like you read an article on Slashdot about it 10 years ago.
You might as well call other tech Linux doesn't play well with "vendor-locking" as this point with no concern, even if there are no real "locks" like that, just lack of support. "TME doesn't work? Literally vendor-locking and Microsoft propaganda!1!"
Security corporations, known for their cargo culting in addition to the usual corporate bullshit, aren't a great example. But bringing then up like they somehow were... makes you wonder indeed.