Are you sure that you cannot tamper with anything with a password in the UEFI bios?

Without a password, anyone with physical access to the computer could enter the UEFI menu and disable Secure Boot, allowing them to load an unsigned or malicious operating system.

Does the UEFI encrypt and sign everything correctly or could you just exchange/ probe a flash chip on the mainboard and still get access?

Many modern CPUs (like those using Intel Boot Guard or AMD Hardware Validated Boot) have a public key burned into the processor’s fuses. The CPU verifies the UEFI firmware’s signature before it even begins to execute. If the flash chip is swapped or modified, the CPU will detect the signature mismatch and refuse to power on the system.

Or - in case of boot priority: How does your UEFI react if I disconnect all internal drives and only plug a bootable USB drive in? will it happily boot from the only possible (and new) option? Might it save that option for the next time?

If you are using custom Secure Boot keys, then the boot device MUST use those keys. If you plug in a bootable USB drive that doesn’t have a properly set up bootloader with the correct keys, you will see an error message.

How does your password work, when I reset the UEFI with the little jumper/button? Etc.

Secure Boot uses a hierarchy of keys stored in the NVRAM. If you replaced the factory default keys (the Platform Key and Key Exchange Keys) with your own custom keys to sign your own bootloader or kernel, those custom keys are stored in the same volatile area that is wiped during a CMOS reset. When the reset occurs, the system deletes your custom keys and reinstalls the manufacturer’s default keys.

Because your OS bootloader was signed with your custom keys and not the factory defaults, the UEFI will now see the bootloader as “untrusted” or “unsigned.” This results in a Secure Boot violation error, and the system will refuse to hand over control to the OS.

Im sure it allows that, but if your disk isnt encrypted, any files you have can easily be tampered with just by running a live boot environment from a cd/usb, or by transferring the disks to another machine.

Secure Boot verifies the kernel/system has not been tampered since the last system update occurred. During that process, the updated files are signed against your UEFI firmware. If an evil maid has access to your files, they can replace the kernel/system files with malicious versions, then re-sign against your firmware, and you would never know the difference.

Thats why it’s important to encrypt the data stored on disk and have your UEFI BIOS secured with a password. Makes it so evil maids cant easily create/delete boot keys and tamper with your Secure Boot, or change the boot priority to a live cd/usb.

It doesnt need to be signed if the hibernation file is stored on an encrypted disk. They use a combination of TPM and Bitlocker to protect the disk that the hyberfil.sys file is stored on.

Honestly, its probably possible to do the same in Linux, but I cant confirm that.

Thats crazy. That aligns with my seven-day/week in-life mandate to avoid giving WB Games and Skydance money.

Huge! Feels good, huh?

We’re all terrible developers because Claude is patching all our slop. Are you intentionally not paying attention to the massive amount of security patching happening this year?

I have a feeling you probably arent keeping up with whats going on, and you telling someome they are a terrible developer doesn’t have a lot of weight behind it.

So by your logic, if you cant code better than Claude, you’re a terrible programmer. Got it.

Guess I better let Claude code for me then. Dont want to add additional humanSlop code.

Its not perfect by any means, but its getting better exponentially. Im hearing from people who have been in software development and cyber security for decades saying that at this rate, we might eventually hit bug-free code. Im optimistic of the technology, but I also subscribe to the idea that its going to peak at some point and thatll be its limit. Its also not sentient, and I’m fairly certain it’ll never be, as much as the sci-fi folks are suggesting it could be.

I also understand the environmental impact this is taking on this planet, and I wholeheartedly believe that anyone who is using this tech absolutely must power it with renewable energy that has low to zero emissions. We needed legislation yesterday, but today would also be a good day to pass laws with strict requirements.

The reason Claude Code is being used is because its producing high quality code that even Linus thinks is good enough for the kernel. You might not have been keeping up with the latest models and the quality improvements. It has completely shifted, even from months ago, let alone years ago.

We’ve been dealing with race conditions since 2016 in the linux kernel all the up until 2026. What do we do about those that actually made it to mainline? Cry about humanSlop?

It hasnt been merged into mainline linux. Bugs are meant to be found prior to that. Looks like everything is working as designed, m8.

Yeah but
humanSlop = good.
aiSlop = bad.

I see no issue with Linus using it, no.

He is using semantic knowledge retrieval systems to aid his coding now, and there will be semantic knowledge retrieval system generated code in the kernel going forward.

If you dont like it, fork it and handwrite your own kernel and don’t use Linus’s fork.

They’ve been trying for 30 years. Now that bad guys have access to semantic knowledge retrieval systems, the good guus will fall behind if they dont use it as well.

This dude hates secure kernels running on his machine.

Yeah Sweeny has been an outspoken hater of Linux his entire life. Now that its gaining marketshare, hes flip flopping. Fuck off Timmy boy

Going to go out on a limb and say that is the pattern with every single OS at the moment. Itll taper off eventually, but there is a lot of technical debt and human slop to clean up for a bit, then things should settle down.

I love insecure kernels. I actually want the bad guys to win the race against security. Only bad guys should using AI. Debian shouldnt be allowed to use AI to keep up with them.

Oh no, my kernel is more secure thanks to AI. How will I ever trust Debian again. Guess I gotta move to a new distro. One that doesnt use the Linux kernel.