3 ms·
This has been my stance for years, but I am open to be persuaded why this is a terrible practice that will lead to kitten murder. I saw someone else give a sim
by 0cf8612b2e1e 2y ago
This has been my stance for years, but I am open to be persuaded why this is a terrible practice that will lead to kitten murder.
I saw someone else give a similar reasoning that if there were a booting error, they would never assume it was a rootkit, but some breakage between all of the booting cruft. I certainly lack any expertise to understand what happens during boot to be able to diagnose problems.
- Sophira 2y agoMy stance is similar: I insist that any computer I use to run my main OS uses the CSM (Compatibility Support Module) method of booting. This effectively eliminates UEFI's role completely after control is handed to the bootloader, using the pre-UEFI boot method of locating the first sector of the boot device and executing that. As a user, I see very little benefit to using UEFI.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- jgerrish 2y agoI have a concern that if I find malware or suspicious activity on a system, when I report it through Virus Total or another channel I won't be believed if secure boot is disabled and that appears in the logs. Or if another threat actor got in during the brief period it was disabled and invalidated the audit trail. "We won't accept any reports because your secure boot chain is too short." To put it bluntly and crudely. Not to dismiss a very real and important real-life issue. I've lost people I love in my life over similar things. I don't want to be in a similar situation in other Walks or Paths of life. It's a powerful incentive mechanism. Even if you're believed in the end how long did it take? How old? And now that difficult thing becomes a talking point when you just wanted to build.