3 ms·

> Are you sure you're not accidentally conflating UEFI with Intel Management Engine (which is indeed spyware)? Pretty sure > may I ask what your objection to

> Are you sure you're not accidentally conflating UEFI with Intel Management Engine (which is indeed spyware)? Pretty sure > may I ask what your objection to EFI is? > I know lots of people have issues with UEFI Secure Boot (mostly based on FUD), but secure boot is strictly optional. I'm not the most knowledgable about this, but as far as I understand it secure boot is a hard requirement for Windows 8 hardware certification on ARM, although as you say it's optional on x86 (presumably for legacy reasons, like users expecting to have control over their machines). This is essentially the same strongarming of OEMs that contributed to killing OS/2, BeOS, etc. so the fact it's (currently) optional for certain machines doesn't quell my concern to having so much of the world reliant on Microsoft keys. > Not to mention many UEFI firmwares lets you load your own keys: I.e. it respects your freedom. That's not a feature I have any intention of using, and prefer to "vote with my wallet" by trying to avoid it and support alternatives. (This is based on my existing understanding, supplemented with skims of pages like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface#Secure_boot_criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_In... ) > As far as I know it's an open standard, and there's nothing fundamentally bad about it. Purely anecdotally/ranting, my only real experience with EFI was trying to boot from a USB stick on someone's machine (to try and recover some of their data, if I recall). I couldn't figure out how to even get a menu or anything, so I gave up. In contrast, it didn't take me long to feel quite at home in the Forth prompt of OpenFirmware; despite never having used Forth before.

josteink 8y ago
> That's not a feature I have any intention of using Fair enough, but it is a security feature I can use to harden my system against attackers. Several Linux-distros support this OOB these days. But if you're not interested, no pressure. Everything works fine without it. > Purely anecdotally/ranting, my only real experience with EFI was trying to boot from a USB stick on someone's machine (to try and recover some of their data, if I recall). I couldn't figure out how to even get a menu or anything, so I gave up. EFI is different for sure. I can't say I blame you for not wanting to read up all about it[1] when you had other stuff to do. That said, EFI is conceptually and practically much simpler than traditional BIOS boot. It doesn't rely on magic bytes being written in specific sectors, it doesn't put a limitation on boot devices or types. (Overly) simplified: It just says that if your medium of choice contains a file a \efi\bootx64.efi on a FAT-partition, your machine will be able to boot that thing with no further action required on anyone's part. As such creating a bootable medium involves 1. having the right FS-type, 2. copying the files. I haven't looked into OpenFirmware so I can't really compare, but compared to traditional BIOS I find EFI conceptually much simpler, much more manageable and to top it off much more secure. I'm happy. [1] https://www.happyassassin.net/2014/01/25/uefi-boot-how-does-that-actually-work-then/ https://www.happyassassin.net/2014/01/25/uefi-boot-how-does-...
- chriswarbo 8y ago
  > compared to traditional BIOS I find EFI conceptually much simpler, much more manageable and to top it off much more secure. It is; but BIOS is a very low bar to beat ;) Switching from the Amiga to the PC around 2000, it surprised me that such a primitive, legacy system like BIOS was still in use at all.

josteink 8y ago

> That's not a feature I have any intention of using Fair enough, but it is a security feature I can use to harden my system against attackers. Several Linux-distros support this OOB these days. But if you're not interested, no pressure. Everything works fine without it. > Purely anecdotally/ranting, my only real experience with EFI was trying to boot from a USB stick on someone's machine (to try and recover some of their data, if I recall). I couldn't figure out how to even get a menu or anything, so I gave up. EFI is different for sure. I can't say I blame you for not wanting to read up all about it[1] when you had other stuff to do. That said, EFI is conceptually and practically much simpler than traditional BIOS boot. It doesn't rely on magic bytes being written in specific sectors, it doesn't put a limitation on boot devices or types. (Overly) simplified: It just says that if your medium of choice contains a file a \efi\bootx64.efi on a FAT-partition, your machine will be able to boot that thing with no further action required on anyone's part. As such creating a bootable medium involves 1. having the right FS-type, 2. copying the files. I haven't looked into OpenFirmware so I can't really compare, but compared to traditional BIOS I find EFI conceptually much simpler, much more manageable and to top it off much more secure. I'm happy. [1] https://www.happyassassin.net/2014/01/25/uefi-boot-how-does-that-actually-work-then/ https://www.happyassassin.net/2014/01/25/uefi-boot-how-does-...

chriswarbo 8y ago
> compared to traditional BIOS I find EFI conceptually much simpler, much more manageable and to top it off much more secure. It is; but BIOS is a very low bar to beat ;) Switching from the Amiga to the PC around 2000, it surprised me that such a primitive, legacy system like BIOS was still in use at all.