Follow the urls bellow to clone the git repository. So if the ISO doesn't support UEFI mode itself, the boot will fail. Add firmware packages to the firmware directory. Any ideas? Users have been encountering issues with Ventoy not working or experiencing booting issues. GRUB mode fixed it! https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/1401532. Thus, on a system where Secure Boot is enabled, users should rightfully expect to be alerted if the EFI bootloader of an ISO booted through Ventoy is not Secure Boot signed or if its signature doesn't validate. I remember that @adrian15 tried to create a sets of fully trusted chainload chains ? ventoy_x64.efi/ventoy_util_x64.efi ) , they do need digital signatures. 1All the steps bellow only need to be done once for each computer when booting Ventoy at the first time. I didn't add an efi boot file - it already existed; I only referenced "No bootfile found for UEFI! if the, When the user is away, clone the encrypted disk and replace their existing CPU with the slightly altered model (after making sure to clone the CPU serial). The USB partition shows very slow after install Ventoy. 2. Can't try again since I upgraded it using another method. Remove Ventoy secure boot key. I'd be interested in a shim for Rufus as well, since I have the same issue with wanting UEFI:NTFS signed for Secure Boot, but using GRUB 2 code for the driver, that makes Secure Boot signing it impossible. You can copy several ISO files at a time, and Ventoy will offer a boot menu where you can select them. When user check the Secure boot support option then only run .efi file with valid signature is select. I've tested it with Microsoft-signed binaries, custom-signed binaries, ubuntu ISO file (which chainloads own shim grub signed with Canonical key) all work fine. Will there be any? https://download.freebsd.org/releases/arm64/aarch64/ISO-IMAGES/13.1/FreeBSD-13.1-RELEASE-arm64-aarch64-disc1.iso. Inspection of the filesystem within the iso image shows the boot file(s) - including the UEFI bootfile - in the respective directory. Have a question about this project? (Haswell Processor) Tested in Memdisk and normal mode with 1.0.08b2. Many thanks! Customizing installed software before installing LM. Results when tested on different models\types of x86 computers - amount of RAM, make/model, latest BIOS? Great , I also tested it today on Kabylake , Skylake and Haswell platforms , booted quickly and well. The injection is just like that I extract the ubuntu.iso and change/add some script and create an new ISO file. ", https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_mYChRFanLEdyttDvT-cn6zH0o6KX7Th/view DSAService.exe (Intel Driver & Support Assistant). Yes, Ventoy does work within UEFI mode and offers a default secure boot feature. It should be specially noted that, no matter USB drive or local disk, all the data will be lost after install Ventoy, please be very careful. ISO file name (full exact name) regular-cinnamon-latest-x86_64.iso - 1.1 GB, openSUSE-Tumbleweed-GNOME-Live-x86_64-Snapshot20200326-Media.iso - 852MB The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: Please test this ISO file with VirtualMachine(e.g. However, users have reported issues with Ventoy not working properly and encountering booting issues. Some bioses have a bug. The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: I believe GRUB (at least v2.04 and previous versions if patched with Fedora patches) already work exactly as you've described. Adding an efi boot file to the directory does not make an iso uefi-bootable. But, UEFI:NTFS is not a SHIM and that's actually the reason why it could be signed by Microsoft (once I switched the bootloader license from GPLv3+ to GPLv2+ and rewrote a UEFI driver derived from GPLv2+ code, which I am definitely not happy at all about), because, in a Secure Boot enabled environment, it can not be used to chain load anything that isn't itself Secure Boot signed. However, after adding firmware packages Ventoy complains Bootfile not found. So maybe Ventoy also need a shim as fedora/ubuntu does. Do NOT put the file to the 32MB VTOYEFI partition. If I am using Ventoy and I went the trouble of enrolling it for Secure Boot, I don't expect it to suddenly flag any unsigned or UEFI bootloader or bootloader with a broken signature, as bootable in a Secure Boot enabled environment. Already have an account? Point 4 from Microsoft's official Secure Boot signing requirements states: Code submitted for UEFI signing must not be subject to GPLv3 or any license that purports to give someone the right to demand authorization keys to be able to install modified forms of the code on a device. Just found that MEMZ.iso from https://mega.nz/folder/TI8ECBKY#i89YUsA0rCJp9kTClz3VlA works, file: Windows XP.ver.SP3.English On the other hand, the expectation is that most users would only get the warning very occasionally, and you definitely want to bring to their attention that they might want to be careful about the current bootloader they are trying to boot, in case they haven't paid that much attention to where they got their image @ventoy, @pbatard, any comments on my solution? slax 15.0 boots However what currently happens is that people who do have Secure Boot enabled will currently not be alerted to these at all. Seriously? Which brings us nicely to what this is all about: Mitigation. Hi, Hiren's Boot CD can be booted by Ventoy in Memdisk mode, you try Ventoy 1.0.08 beta2. Perform a scan to check if there are any existing errors on the USB. They do not provide a legacy boot option if there is a fat partition with an /EFI folder on it. @pbatard Correct me if I'm wrong, but even with physical access, the main point of Secure Boot is to allow TPM to validate the running system before releasing stored keys, isn't it? Which is why you want to have as many of these enabled in parallel when they exist (such as TPM + Secure Boot, i.e. A lot of work to do. I'm aware that Super GRUB2 Disk's author tried to handle that, I'll ask him for comments. I'll think about it and try to add it to ventoy. Happy to be proven wrong, I learned quite a bit from your messages. You can grab latest ISO files here : Now there's no need to format the disk again and again or to extract anything-- with Ventoy simply copy the ISO file to the USB drive and boot it. I was just objecting to your claim that Secure Boot is useless when someone has physical access to the device, which I don't think is true, as it is still (afaik) required for TPM-based encryption to work correctly. No bootfile found for UEFI! Will polish and publish the code later. Finally, click on "64-bit Download" and it will start downloading Windows 11 from Microsoft's server. Ventoy supports ISO, WIM, IMG, VHD(x), EFI files using an exFAT filesystem. but CorePure64-13.1.iso does not as it does not contain any EFI boot files. It woks only with fallback graphic mode. You signed in with another tab or window. Personally, I don't have much of an issue with Ventoy using the current approach as a stopgap solution, as long as it is agreed that this is only a stopgap, since it comes with a huge drawback, and that a better solution (validation of that the UEFI bootloaders chain loaded from GRUB pass Secure Boot validation when Secure Boot has been enabled by the user) needs to be implemented in the long run. So all Ventoy's behavior doesn't change the secure boot policy. And, unfortunately, with Ventoy as it stands, this whole trust mechanism is indeed broken, because you can take an official Windows installation ISO, insert a super malicious UEFI bootloader (that performs a Windows installation while also installing malware) and, even if users have Secure Boot enabled (and added Ventoy in Mok manager), they will not be alerted at all that they are running a malicious bootloader, whereas this is the whole point of Secure Boot! This completely defeats Secure Boot and should not happen, as the only EFI bootloader that should be whitelisted for Secure Boot should be Ventoy itself, and any other EFI bootloader should still be required to pass Secure Boot validation. By default, the ISO partition can not be mounted after boot Linux (will show device busy when you mount). Again, the major problem I see with this fine discussion is that everybody appears to be tiptoeing around the fact that some users have no clue what Secure Boot is intended for (only that, because it says "Secure" they don't want to turn it off), and, rather than trying to educate them about that, we're trying to find ways to keep them "feeling safe" when the choices they might make would leave their system anything but. This could be useful for data recovery, OS re-installation, or just for booting from USB without thinking about additional steps. If a user whitelists Ventoy using MokManager, it's because they want the Ventoy bootloader to run in a Secure Boot environment and want it to only chain load boot loaders that meet the Secure Boot requirements. However, some ISO files dont support UEFI mode so booting those files in UEFI will not work. Hi MFlisar , if you want use that now with HBCD you must extract the iso but the ventoy.dat on the root of the iso recreate the iso with example: ntlite oder oder tools and than you are able to boot from. Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-32-1.6.iso: Works fine, all hard drive can be properly detected. TPM encryption has historically been independent of Secure Boot. For these who select to bypass secure boot. If Secure Boot is not enabled, proceed as normal. This ISO file doesn't change the secure boot policy. I would assert that, when Secure Boot is enabled, every single time an unsigned bootloader is loaded, a warning message should be displayed. And we've already been over whether USB should be treated differently than internal SATA or NVMe (which, in your opinion it should, and which in mine, and I will assert the majority of people who enable Secure Boot, it shouldn't). Probably you didn't delete the file completely but to the recycle bin. Go ahead and download Rufus from here. Mybe the image does not support X64 UEFI! There are two bugs in Ventoy: Unsigned bootloader Linux ISOs or ISOs without UEFI support does not boot with Secure Boot enabled. All other distros can not be booted. An encoding issue, perhaps (for the text)? I test it in a VirtualMachine (VMWare with secure boot enabled). I didn't try install using it though. Ventoy supports both BIOS Legacy and UEFI, however, some ISO files do not support UEFI mode. If you want you can toggle Show all devices option, then all the devices will be in the list. If anyone has an issue - please state full and accurate details. Please follow the guid bellow. 6. So that means that Ventoy will need to use a different key indeed. Therefore, unless Ventoy makes it very explicit that "By enrolling Ventoy for Secure Boot, you understand that you are also granting anyone with the capability of running non Secure Boot enabled boot loaders on your computer, including potential malicious ones that would otherwise have been detected by Secure Boot", I will maintain that there is a rather important security issue that needs to be addressed. No. And of course, by the same logic, anything unsigned should not boot when Secure Boot is active. So I don't really see how that could be used to solve the specific problem we are being faced with here, because, however you plan to use UEFI:NTFS when Secure Boot is enabled, your target (be it Ventoy or something else) must be Secure Boot signed. Format UDF in Windows: format x: /fs:udf /q
Asks for full pathname of shell. @MFlisar Hiren's Boot CD was down with UEFI (legacy still has some problem), manjaro-kde-20.0-rc3-200422-linux56.iso BOOT
Denon Zone 2 Won't Turn On,
My Goiter Disappeared,
Articles V
