this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2025
131 points (99.2% liked)
Linux
56676 readers
417 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Can you explain the detailed reason why you think that? Voicing opinions is nice of course but explaining the thought process and logic is, I think, almost always more interesting to other people.
To start with, what do you think is the "normal users" threath model? And, for example, if one happens to be a member of any of the various minorities that authoritarian governments of every color happen to single out and persecute in your countries case, what would you want to protect from? Or if you are, say, a lawyer, and have a professional obligation to protect sensitive data from theft?
Secure Boot is a really contrived and, frankly, bad defense against an attack that is extremely difficult to execute in reality and does not happen often (are there any examples of a bootloader replacement against a home desktop in the wild?).
An actually good solution would be firmware support for LUKS-style FDE (with a password-encrypted key which then encrypts the rest of the disk), so that your bootloader is encrypted with the rest of your system and impossible to substitute without erasing the rest of the disk, until you enter the password. This way there's no need for key enrolment into firmware, and firmware manufacturers don't have to just trust MS. (the firmware of course needs to be protected too, by signing it with the manufacturer's key; if you flash something unsigned, a warning pops up Android-style before every boot).
If you are hiding something from the state (like your sexual orientation or something), your energy is much better spent encrypting your communications online and keeping your identities anonymous. If you are already suspicious enough to try and pull a bootloader replacement attack on you, any authoritarian state which would do that in the first place will just throw you in jail and fabricate evidence as needed.
The main advantage of SB is TPM. At runtime the key isn't available and unlocking your disk works automatically as long as nothing has been tampered with (which is then also a nice canary: if you suddenly have to enter your password during boot, something's off).
There's nothing technically preventing using TPM without secure boot. This is a limitation imposed by OEMs. In fact I have a separate hardware encryption key that I encrypt my (laptop) drive with, and even I don't (can't) know the private key. I only know the pin that is needed to unlock it. If motherboard OEMs implemented something like this on the motherboard, with the ability to decrypt the bootloader partition before booting into it, this would solve everything.