669
Windows 11 scores dead last in gaming performance tests against 3 Linux gaming distros
(www.notebookcheck.net)
this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2023
669 points (87.8% liked)
Linux
48190 readers
1335 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 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Proprietary UEFI BIOS is, but for a secure system with local manipulation prevention it can be needed. Also secureboot is a security measurement against malware so no, its simply the best we have.
Look at Coreboot if you want a secure modern system
Secure Boot is just Bootloader Signature Enforcement controlled by M$, it's not gonna prevent Superfish 2.0 from happening.
Unfortunately, I don't have a coreboot-able system. When I move out I'll make that a priority.
I mean you saw LogoFAIL right?
I never bought my current machines. Funnily enough, they don't show any logos on bootup, (Windows Boot Manager is smth else)
The vulnerability actually isn’t in Windows Boot Manager, it’s a flaw in the image-parsing code of the UEFI itself. That’s why it’s able to bypass SecureBoot.
It just happens that for whatever reason you can easily update the image file from within Windows/Linux itself. The fact they don’t show a logo currently does not mean you’re immune, as the system might just be showing a black screen at that point. Code can be injected into an image file without perceptibly affecting the image output, so you’d likely be able to use a “black screen” logo. If your computer has a UEFI instead of a BIOS, which is pretty much everything from the last 10yrs, then you are more than likely at risk.
My computer likely isn’t susceptible, and that’s because it’s a Dell workstation. While the bug still exists in the image parser, Dell has locked things down so it’s pretty much impossible to change the boot logo from userspace.
Yes, IK WBM is not the problem here. My systems don't show a logo at all, and they don't have a "hide logo" options.
FWIW, some firmware allow changing it during the update procedure. I remember having to update my ThinkPad's firmware and it had that option.
That’s valid, I looked into it with Dell and later articles have mentioned they aren’t susceptible.