>BIOS doesn't have option to disable secure boot
It's over, isn't it?
BIOS doesn't have option to disable secure boot
William Gomez
Other urls found in this thread:
Xavier Thompson
why would you want to disable secure boot?
Wyatt Roberts
>he bought a shitty computer
Presumably if it doesn't have an option to disable it, there's also no option to put your own keys.
Jeremiah Brooks
No it isn't, just use github.com
It is signed by M$ and lets you boot whatever you want
Caleb Barnes
Speaking of bullshit-mitigation packages, I have a laptop that doesn't have CSM. Is there any shim to boot legacy BIOS stuff with a UEFI that's missing CSM?
Xavier Morris
>BIOS has engrish language
Joseph Myers
Don't think that exists, the best you'll get is probably a virtual machine
Adam Foster
Rats. I was hoping someone had taken the SeaBIOS stuff that VMs use and built it as a UEFI executable or something like that.
Joseph Jenkins
what are you trying to boot?
maybe there is bootloader for that specific thing
Nolan Moore
biefircate is an attempt in this direction. It's early alpha though.
Jaxon Brown
Proprietary legacy stuff that PXE boots over the network and relies on BIOS services, primarily for testing purposes. Booting a fully functioning DOS would
get me there too, but that relies on BIOS services too so an alternate bootloader wouldn't help unless it replicates those.
Thanks, this looks interesting though it's obviously not working for this stuff yet.
Jaxson Gutierrez
FYI, some machines (such as Dells) hide the CSM behind the legacy option ROM configuration: they work together, and it won't work until both are configured to the firmware's satisfaction.
Easton Richardson
don't you need to disable it to install a linux distro?
Liam Davis
No, most distros (Fedora, Ubuntu, ...) support it
Things like arch and gentoo don't tho
Angel Moore
Pretty much most major distros are signed by Microsoftâs 3rd party UEFI key. But an annoying restricting is that you also can only load signed kernel modules, making DKMS and such a bit of a pain that involves deploying custom keys.
Carter Lewis
>Booting a fully functioning DOS would
>get me there too, but that relies on BIOS services too so an alternate bootloader wouldn't help unless it replicates those.
i have heard something somewhere sometime that freedos could be somehow booted with bubblegum on uefi
idk about reality
Alexander Phillips
>you also can only load signed kernel modules
How is that a disadvantage?
Hudson Allen
>most
Only a couple of them.
The only actual reason to leave Secure Boot enabled is if you are using company hardware. Otherwise it's just an annoying placebo.
Justin Sullivan
>placebo
Are you retarded?
Michael Phillips
That whenever you install a kernel module (say: VirtualBox) you need to go through 50 steps of hell to deploy your own key because codesigning is a meme on Linux and every god damn module is built from source instead of pre-compiled and shipped by the distro signed.
Parker Adams
post a fucking model dimwit.
Julian Stewart
>never heard of coreboot