Post A0g5xUlCcDON8TuLBo by nighthacker2003@mastodon.social
(DIR) More posts by nighthacker2003@mastodon.social
(DIR) Post #A0a27A7Wdy3FFjwZbU by njoseph@social.masto.host
2020-10-26T18:35:19Z
0 likes, 2 repeats
"They are successfully taking away our general-purpose computers and replacing them with little more than Internet appliances.""While an Internet appliance has its place, so does a general-purpose computer.""Many are content to use 'devices' that are merely stripped-down Internet appliances masquerading as reasonable substitutes for what they have replaced."http://misc-stuff.terraaeon.com/articles/locked-down-computers.html
(DIR) Post #A0a27Em5L6s7ggx1NY by vertigo@hackers.town
2020-10-26T18:55:06Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@njoseph """Laptop manufacturers have also justified decreased usability in the name of security. I should call their solutions "security theater", because they seem to benefit Microsoft more than computer users. Many have said that UEFI is an overly-complicated system that provides a much larger attack surface than BIOS, and several security flaws in UEFI implementations have been found that seem to negate many of the supposed benefits."""I have been saying stuff like this for YEARS now; and I'm routinely chided at for it.Yet another person who gets it. I stand by my firm belief that UEFI is unnecessary, and dare I say it, utterly undesirable. I've been burned by UEFI too many times in the past. I've learned my lesson the hard way.
(DIR) Post #A0a27ImaRBeM7PDTiS by nighthacker2003@mastodon.social
2020-10-27T05:46:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@vertigoAFAIK, UEFI itself is good because it's less kludgy and more flexible. It's just that laptop manufacturers ahip crappy half-assed implementations. And secure boot is more often than not just "Windows only mode."@njoseph
(DIR) Post #A0a27MSAn1hJVFhES8 by vertigo@hackers.town
2020-10-27T07:34:41Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@nighthacker2003 @njoseph And there it is. Again.We're not going to agree on this, and I lack the patience to explain why, yet again. Forgive me if I sound rude; but, after many years of sticking to my guns on this, I grow tired to repeating myself.UEFI is a product of the WinTel trusted computing initiative; full stop. It's complex, it's unnecessary (for pete's sake, all you're doing is bringing in a kernel image), and it's loaded with nooks and crannies which the UEFI license actively encourages vendors to exploit (read it some time) to their own benefit. A study of its API reveals that it is essentially an OS unto itself, completely with support for device drivers and installable filesystems.A BIOS doesn't need to be flexible. It needs to bring in a kernel. And, that's all that it needs to do. Basic Input/Output System. It's in its name. Emphasis on basic.
(DIR) Post #A0g5xGgQx9G7TdZKoS by nighthacker2003@mastodon.social
2020-10-27T14:02:06Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@vertigoOut of curiosity, what's your opinion on coreboot?@njoseph
(DIR) Post #A0g5xL1qnSlcxDcUka by vertigo@hackers.town
2020-10-27T17:25:38Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nighthacker2003 @njoseph I hold a position similar to Ron Minnich, whom I met personally at a RISC-V Workshop some years ago: it's a necessary evil. He felt at the time, as I do today, that the system firmware should be as simple as possible and serve a single purpose (to load the host OS kernel image then get out of the way). Much of coreboot's contemporary complexity stems from inherent complexity working with PC hardware (e.g., training SDRAM of various types and speeds, etc.).System 76 is apparently making the move to use CoreBoot on their new line of laptops; I was sad when they announced that my model of laptop would not be considered for the firmware update to CoreBoot.I'm glad it exists though, and have considered using it for my own Kestrel-3 project in the past. I remember Ron looking at me quizzically and asking me, "Why? You already have your own bootstrap mechanism that's perfectly adequate on its own."
(DIR) Post #A0g5xNOG17sYHI7PxA by nighthacker2003@mastodon.social
2020-10-30T05:06:12Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@vertigo @njoseph Sorry it took me so long to reply, I had a lot of homework.I like the position that the system firmware should serve a single purpose (to load the host OS kernel image then get out of the way). However, I don't believe that BIOS (which you seem to prefer) does that either. It provides an entire abstraction layer that lets you access the machine's hardware using BIOS calls.
(DIR) Post #A0g5xQ9pjD7irQORO4 by nighthacker2003@mastodon.social
2020-10-30T05:06:20Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@vertigo @njoseph In modern devices, it often even emulates older hardware such as PS/2 keyboards and floppies so you can use new hardware on 40 year old OSes. It performs a diagnostic test of the hardware on every boot. It can perform heat management via SMM if the OS doesn't support ACPI. On some modern machines, it can even load kernels from the network. And my laptop's BIOS likes to change the screen brightness when the power source changes.
(DIR) Post #A0g5xST38jgQ1bOocK by nighthacker2003@mastodon.social
2020-10-30T05:07:39Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@vertigo @njoseph The main thing I don't like about BIOS is how it expects the kernel to be in a fixed position on the disk and have a fixed size, that happens to be way too small for modern kernels. In practice, this means that the BIOS loads a piece of code that does nothing but load another piece of code shoehorned in between the MBR and the first filesystem that depending on the installation might or might not have to load more code from the filesystem that then finally loads the kernel.
(DIR) Post #A0g5xUlCcDON8TuLBo by nighthacker2003@mastodon.social
2020-10-30T05:08:04Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@vertigo @njoseph I think it's better for the firmware to know how to use a filesystem so it can load the kernel directly from the drive in one step, regardless of the size, and maybe even add support for multiple kernels per physical disk eliminating the need for an on-disk boot menu. It makes the firmware more complex, but the overall process less complex.
(DIR) Post #A0g5xXxMjRu734cb44 by nighthacker2003@mastodon.social
2020-10-30T05:09:21Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@vertigo @njoseph That's why I initially liked UEFI, but as you pointed out it comes with a bunch of other nonsense (DRM boot, EFI shell, an entire OS, etc.) as part of the standard, so I think my opinion on UEFI is be changed. However, you seem to be much more knowledgeable on this than I am. Is there a reason why firmware shouldn't have filesystem support, or is it just that UEFI is shit? (Or are you tired of explaining this and I should look at your profile for your explanation of this?)
(DIR) Post #A0g5xarRvtxE3asPlA by vertigo@hackers.town
2020-10-30T05:46:51Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@nighthacker2003 @njoseph For me, the issue is the motives behind the technology's creation, especially considering who was primarily responsible for creating it.UEFI is terribly complicated; however, were it not for the fact that it was hoisted onto us by MS and Intel at about the time of their Trusted Computing Initiative, I probably would just be upset about its complexity and no more.Consider, Amiga's Kickstart kernel is in ROM, and boots the machine using a partition scheme which is more in-line with what you prefer. However, there's no technology present which could lock a user out from installing alternative OSes. Indeed, Amiga was one of the first 68030 platforms for Linux.I just don't trust UEFI, especially after having a $1500 motherboard brick itself after trying to install a UEFI-enabled distribution of Ubuntu Linux on it, despite having turned all secure-boot features off via the UEFI GUI interface. ASUS then wanted me to send the board to them along with an additional $700 for diagnostics to see what caused the fault.No thanks!Someone I know on Twitter asked me if I would be OK with SecureBoot technology if we, the consumers, were in charge of the keys. Answer to that is a qualified yes; not ONLY would we need to be exclusively in charge of those keys, but also, the source code to the firmware would need to be open AND libre (e.g., GNU licensed), to help prevent the UEFI bastardizations that seem prevalent in the PC market today.
(DIR) Post #A0mwIlzQ75PDDYmihc by kzimmermann@fosstodon.org
2020-11-02T13:02:09Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@njoseph I reverberate so much with these thoughts. Really sad to see how the concept of a "computer" is being reduced day after day to mean something that gives you access to Faceboogle when you use it, and tracks and reports your activity when you don't.I barely touch my phone these days, my truly-general computers fulfill everything that I need to do except messaging some key people. And, again, super sad to see those key people basically living off those "smart" phones
(DIR) Post #A0mwP8OBkHKGQTP40e by jauntywunderkind420@cybre.space
2020-10-26T19:13:40Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@njoseph those quotes resound with me very strongly.but i've found most laptops are quite good UEFI standard devices, don't have much to complain about. they run Linux pretty well! :)"app consoles" was a term I heard semi-recently, wish i could remember where i heard it first. the idea that now devices are like gaming consoles, but for apps. here's your experience! hope it's good! cause that's what you get! #AppConsole
(DIR) Post #A0n6ne1UmWhr1q7BTc by urusan@fosstodon.org
2020-11-02T14:59:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@vertigo @nighthacker2003 @njoseph I got a coreboot laptop from System76, and it was amazing.I needed to go change something in the BIOS, and was unable to find it. The only thing there was what I would have considered a boot selector screen.Then I suddenly found the answer: everything that would have been in the BIOS was in the normal OS settings. My mind was blown.Why isn't this the norm? It's so much nicer and easier.