3 ms·

You can in fact disable secure boot on the arm surfaces. The problem is nobody really has put enough effort to port Linux to it. Some people started but haven'

You can in fact disable secure boot on the arm surfaces. The problem is nobody really has put enough effort to port Linux to it. Some people started but haven't gotten very far https://github.com/orgs/linux-surface/projects/1 https://github.com/orgs/linux-surface/projects/1 https://github.com/linux-surface/aarch64-firmware https://github.com/linux-surface/aarch64-firmware https://github.com/linux-surface/aarch64-packages https://github.com/linux-surface/aarch64-packages >, a Windows update added a number of Linux distributions to the Secure Boot blacklist It was due to a bug/and or not being able to detect all manners of dual boot correctly. The goal was not to blacklist old distros, it was to blacklist vulnerable boot managers Microsoft's response and fixes were provided: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/release-health/status-windows-11-23h2#august-2024-security-update-might-impact-linux-boot-in-dual-boot-setup-devices https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/release-health/sta...

AshamedCaptain 2y ago
> You can in fact disable secure boot on the arm surfaces. Not all. I know for a fact you could not in the RT/2. This is despite the fact that people _do put effort_. This is how I know, for example, that some Linux workarounds for "funny" ACPI interpretations had to be also "ported" to the ARM architecture in ACPI ARM Linux because Windows is literally making the same "bugs" all over again. Except, this time, Windows hardware is in the _minority_, and there's plenty of ARM ACPI devices that do not require these workarounds... > It was due to a bug/and or not being able to detect all manners of dual boot correctly. Sure. It is also a bug they just applied these blacklists automatically in the first place? It is also a bug that the list of blacklisted bootloaders mostly comprises non-MS oses, despite the fact there are well-known issues in many Windows versions?

AshamedCaptain 2y ago

> You can in fact disable secure boot on the arm surfaces. Not all. I know for a fact you could not in the RT/2. This is despite the fact that people _do put effort_. This is how I know, for example, that some Linux workarounds for "funny" ACPI interpretations had to be also "ported" to the ARM architecture in ACPI ARM Linux because Windows is literally making the same "bugs" all over again. Except, this time, Windows hardware is in the _minority_, and there's plenty of ARM ACPI devices that do not require these workarounds... > It was due to a bug/and or not being able to detect all manners of dual boot correctly. Sure. It is also a bug they just applied these blacklists automatically in the first place? It is also a bug that the list of blacklisted bootloaders mostly comprises non-MS oses, despite the fact there are well-known issues in many Windows versions?