Certification

The documentation presents Windows requirements and details first, with extensive specificity about Windows tools (e.g., BitLocker, VBS, HVCI) and dependencies, while Linux is described as 'not yet supported' and its requirements are marked as 'expected'. Windows-specific tools and features are named and linked, whereas Linux equivalents are only briefly mentioned (e.g., dm-crypt, dm-verity, IMA) and lack the same level of detail or guidance. There are no Linux command-line or configuration examples, and some requirements reference Windows versions or features without Linux parity.

• Provide Linux support and requirements at parity with Windows, including finalized (not 'expected') requirements.
• Include Linux-specific examples and configuration guidance, similar to the detail given for Windows (e.g., how to enable dm-crypt, dm-verity, IMA, or set up secure boot with U-Boot).
• Reference and link to Linux documentation and tools with the same prominence as Windows tools (e.g., provide links to Linux security baseline guides, dm-crypt documentation, etc.).
• Avoid presenting Windows requirements first by default; consider a neutral introduction or parallel presentation for all platforms.
• Where Windows tools are mentioned (e.g., BitLocker, VBS, HVCI), explicitly mention and describe Linux equivalents (e.g., dm-crypt, SELinux, AppArmor, etc.) in the same context.
• Add Linux-specific resources and troubleshooting links, and ensure that all requirements have actionable Linux guidance.

The documentation presents Windows requirements and tooling first, with detailed and finalized requirements, while Linux is explicitly marked as 'not yet supported' and only provides 'expected requirements.' Windows-specific tools and technologies (e.g., BitLocker, VBS, HVCI, Windows Defender, Schannel cipher suites) are referenced by name, while Linux equivalents are only generically described or listed as 'similar.' There is a lack of concrete Linux examples, resources, or references to common Linux security tools and practices, and the Linux section is less detailed and more tentative.

• Provide Linux support parity by finalizing Linux requirements and removing 'not yet supported' disclaimers when ready.
• List Linux and Windows requirements side-by-side or in parallel, rather than presenting Windows first and in more detail.
• Reference Linux-native tools and technologies by name (e.g., LUKS/dm-crypt for storage encryption, SELinux/AppArmor for code integrity, auditd/syslog for security logging, OpenSSL/GnuTLS for TLS cipher suites) in the same way as Windows tools.
• Include links to Linux-specific documentation and best practices, similar to the Windows links provided.
• Offer concrete Linux configuration examples and guidance, not just generic requirements.
• Ensure that any Microsoft-specific dependencies (e.g., Azure Attestation, Defender for Endpoint) are clearly documented for Linux, with Linux-specific setup instructions or alternatives where appropriate.

The documentation exclusively describes how to validate Edge Secured-core status using Windows GUI tools and navigation, with no mention of Linux or cross-platform methods. All instructions and screenshots are Windows-specific, and there are no command-line or Linux-based alternatives provided.

• Add equivalent instructions for Linux-based devices, if Edge Secured-core is relevant or supported on Linux.
• If not supported on Linux, explicitly state that Edge Secured-core is a Windows-only feature to clarify the scope.
• Provide command-line alternatives (e.g., PowerShell, Windows Command Prompt, or Linux shell commands) for users who may not use the Windows GUI.
• Include a section or note on how to check similar security features on Linux (such as TPM version, memory integrity, or disk encryption status) for broader applicability.

The documentation page exclusively lists Edge Secured-core certified devices that run Windows 10 IoT Enterprise or Windows 11 IoT Enterprise. There are no examples or mentions of devices running Linux or other operating systems, which demonstrates a strong Windows bias and omits Linux equivalents.

• Include certified devices that run Linux-based operating systems (such as Ubuntu Core, Yocto, or other common IoT Linux distributions) if available.
• Add a note clarifying whether Edge Secured-core certification is available or planned for Linux devices, or explicitly state if it is Windows-only.
• If Linux support is not currently available, provide a roadmap or guidance for Linux users seeking similar security assurances.
• Ensure future updates to the documentation consider parity in listing and describing devices for both Windows and Linux platforms.

The documentation page demonstrates a Windows-first bias by explicitly supporting Windows IoT Enterprise and Azure Sphere OS, with Linux support only mentioned as 'coming in the future.' There are no Linux-specific examples, instructions, or references, and the focus is on Windows-based certification.

• Provide a clear roadmap or timeline for Linux support to assure Linux users of upcoming parity.
• Include references to Linux equivalents or alternative processes, even if support is in preview or limited.
• Add a section outlining what Linux users can do now (e.g., join a waitlist, participate in a preview, or follow updates).
• Ensure future updates include Linux-specific examples, tools, and certification steps alongside Windows instructions.