https://www.zdnet.fr/actualites/les-utilisateurs-de-linux-confrontes-a-un-casse-tete-lie-au-secure-boot-de-microsoft-voici-la-solution-497303.htm
they are caca !
There will be side effects.
Some of the BIOS, even if they delivered updated content,
the UEFI BIOS code itself is defective! And this is NOT a joke.
The fact the certificates up to now, have been working, has
hidden the defects in the UEFI code. After this month, we may begin
to see boots failing WITH SECURE BOOT TURNED OFF and just hard
drives plugged in and the BIOS delivers a black screen.
It's going to make running some of those computers, a miserable
experience. And buying new hardware will NOT fix it. It will
be a casino, where you buy some of the brands and you will
receive yet another broken BIOS implementation.
What's needed is to get rid of all the proprietary junk
and have the industry standardize on a "Coreboot that runs everywhere".
Or at least, to separate the BIOS into two halves. One half,
operates the GPIO and handles the quirks of individual hardware designs.
The other half of the BIOS would be a standardized "boot" handler,
with all the pretty UEFI boot items and so on, and this design
would have to be accompanied by hardware designs with enough NAND/NOR
storage of sufficient size to handle a deluge of db/dbx crapola.
By deploying a scheme with 32KB sized stores, this messy situation
CANNOT last. it's untenable, even with SBAT (and SBAT doesn't even work in
my room, it is broken on all machines).
I do not think the current technical articles, hint enough at
what potentially could happen. In the past, we NEVER had to worry
about our BIOS holding the machine hostage. Now, the situation
is unclear and cannot even reasonably be evaluated or determined
by mere humans.
If there is an uptick in these issues, I will not be able to help
you, as there is no technical means of determining whether MSI,
Asus or Gigabyte have done a good job of configuring their
Award or AMI BIOS. There could be weird symptoms. And buying
a motherboard replacement -- may give more weird symptoms.
I would not be so concerned, if Secure Boot = OFF in the BIOS
actually worked, but it does not actually mean that, it means
Secure Boot = "Maybe OFF (and maybe not)".
Paul
On Mon, 6/22/2026 2:43 PM, german usenet wrote:
Or at least, to separate the BIOS into two halves. One half,
operates the GPIO and handles the quirks of individual hardware designs.
The other half of the BIOS would be a standardized "boot" handler,
with all the pretty UEFI boot items and so on
Paul
Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> writes:designs.
On Mon, 6/22/2026 2:43 PM, german usenet wrote:
Or at least, to separate the BIOS into two halves. One half,
operates the GPIO and handles the quirks of individual hardware
The other half of the BIOS would be a standardized "boot" handler,
with all the pretty UEFI boot items and so on
<grin>
We've used this harware/software layout before. Around 1980: CP/M !
"Plus ‡a change, plus c'est la mˆme chose."
| Sysop: | Jacob Catayoc |
|---|---|
| Location: | Pasay City, Metro Manila, Philippines |
| Users: | 4 |
| Nodes: | 4 (0 / 4) |
| Uptime: | 495145:26:23 |
| Calls: | 165 |
| Files: | 574 |
| D/L today: |
29 files (9,998K bytes) |
| Messages: | 78,198 |