What people in the comments here expect the average person to know about and do is pretty out of touch with reality.
this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2025
81 points (100.0% liked)
Linux
8546 readers
404 users here now
A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)
Also, check out:
Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 25 comments
sorted by:
hot
top
controversial
new
old
Linux users who have Secure Boot enabled on their systems [...]
No.
Some Linux users lazily using shim-based Secure Boot implementations provided out of the box by some distros. Mostly exactly because that's a setup that came with their install where they don't have to do anything and they also don't actually care.
Everyone actually caring for Secure Boot has the option to setup and use their own proper keys easily.
The real problem is (and has been for a long time) the amount of absolute trash level UEFI implementations still in use nthat are basically non-functional once you try to use any Secure Boot funtionality beyond just using the pre-installed MS keys.
I know Ill get flak for this, but you shouldn't be using end-of-life hardware, including motherboards. Once the vendor stops providing firmware updates, its time to look at replacing that hardware. It doesn't matter what operating system you use, if there are hardware vulnerabilities, then your OS isn't able to properly protect you.
If your hardware is still supported, you should regularly be updating the firmware.
This implies a world in which motherboard vendors actually regularly publish updates for their boards, or publish information about a board being officially end-of-life, which, for many consumer boards, just isn't the case.
Some vendors still have a red flag on their support page discouraging uefi updates unless you're actively experiencing problems.
Some vendors still have a red flag on their support page discouraging uefi updates unless you're actively experiencing problems.
I dont know which vendor you are referring to, but that is a horrible practice. There should be active support and release notes stating that "This release is a security fix" at a bare minimum. If your motherboard manufacturer does not offer that, then I could never recommend them to someone. They need to be held to a higher standard.
At least from my experience, ASUS, Dell, and Apple will publish that information.
From https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/GA-AX370M-Gaming-3-rev-1x/support#support-dl-bios (manual contains the same, plus a recommendation to keep the default settings):
" Warning: Because BIOS flashing is potentially risky, if you do not encounter problems using the current version of BIOS, it is recommended that you not flash the BIOS. To flash the BIOS, do it with caution. Inadequate BIOS flashing may result in system malfunction."
Its funny because the release notes for their December '21 BIOS update says:
Major vulnerabilities updates, customers are strongly encouraged to update to this release at the earliest.
And many of their release notes say that they fix security issues. I would say that supercedes the footnote at the bottom that says to update your BIOS only if you're having issues.
Plus, doesn't Gigabyte have A/B BIOS updates? So if you have a failed flash, you can switch to the previous BIOS that was working?
Most of the recent(ish) updates are vulnerability fixes (after all, the platform is over eight years old now), and they've removed various intermediate versions already or there'd be even more.
This board has a dual BIOS, the integrated flashing utility by default only flashes the main BIOS, and you have to enable the option to flash the backup explicitly. Never had to use the backup, afaik it activates automatically if booting the main BIOS fails several times.
My ASUS "only" has a recovery function (flash BIOS from USB stick automatically if bootup fails) and no warning that I could find.
I'm pretty sure that warning used to be on the UEFI download page for Biostar boards, but they've completely redesigned it, so if it was them, it isn't there anymore.
I've seen some Asus and MSI Boards getting only uefi updates marked as beta, with the next update, months later, also being marked as beta. With Asus, there have been allegation that they try to get out of warranty claims this way.
I've had less problems with Dell and Lenovo, which probably comes from them being more enterprise focused. I think the problem is that the for the average consumer, uefi updates are last on their mind when picking a board.
Apple, and, to a lesser degree, Lenovo and Dell, seem hardly comparable, since their focus isn't selling mainboards as a stand-alone component.
Sounds like a good reason to demand coreboot or libreboot support for all computers you buy
As much as I would like to agree with that, each piece of hardware is going to have its own niche set of problems that the coreboot/libreboot team is not going to research and maintain. It wont be because they dont want to. They just dont have the resources and source code from the vendors. You will get your standardized updates, but it will not cover a lot of the proprietary blobs necessary for the hardware to operate.
Once the vendor stops supporting it, thats it. Its a ticking time bomb. Its how we get articles like the one in the OP. The vendor and user are not going to put in work to keep this updated. Even if they had coreboot/libreboot, it wont get updated.
Its a shitty thing that isn't easy to solve except by tying in hardware and software into single, unified products that are written in perfect code. Its not possible.
Well, no.
There are only a handful of hardware manufacturers for each component on a motherboard that might require firmware and once a motherboard is supported by coreboot, it can be maintained at a component level across all vendors who use that component (thus being cheaper than rolling their own proprietary firmware and cheaper to maintain over the lifetime of support) and we only need 1 single person in the whole world to keep it maintained.
Generally, motherboard manufacturers source their components from other companies. They do not manufacture the entire board themselves. This includes CPUs, Wifi cards, USB controllers, bluetooth, audio, display controllers, etc. Each and every one of them create new products, maintain their own firmware for all those new products, and push updates to the motherboard manufacturers when there are updates.
Coreboot/libreboot do not update those components themselves. They also must be provided that source code.
Just for coreboot alone, the last release had more than 120 contributors push over 900 commits. One person is not able to maintain that piece of software, as it is an enormous task.
If the problem was getting it to work in the first place, then you would be right.
But once code is there and working, maintenance is an easier problem especially since git is involved.
Binary blobs on the other hand are just endless pain and only get worse with time.
In the words of Bryan Cantrill, we are at war with proprietary firmware and unfortunately at this moment in the war we are losing.
Even if the code is there, you will need someone to maintain that code. Easier or not, even in a git repository, those individual components will eventually not have the support necessary to patch it.
If an eight year old usb controller has flaws, and the manufacturer is not maintaining that git repository anymore because they cannot possibly afford to hire someone to look at that code after so long, then it is going to keep those flaws. It wont matter if that code is proprietary or open source and included in coreboot. Its just simply not feasible to support hardware properly once most of the world has moved on to other products.
We agree that we can not expect companies to support products beyond the timeframe which they expect to sell and support their own products. Code under FSF approved licenses means that anyone can say, “I need this supported” and choose to pay anyone that they want to get support. Or at the barest minimum, ensure existing functionality is not removed from them, just because company A demands that you their customer should buy something newer and that it would be in their financial best interest to brick their customers’ shit.
I wish all the firmware for every motherboard was made public and open sourced. Even if a company has proprietary firmware/drivers, I would hope that once that product reaches end of life that they do in fact open source that code so that someone else can pick up where they left off.
I 100% agree that they should not brick their hardware once it reaches end of life. There might be someone out there who would take on the task of maintaining it, which is better than nobody maintaining it.
Are there any hardware manufacturers that aren't completely shit at providing firmware updates? My motherboard does still get updates but they can take a while to arrive even when there's a known exploit for my CPU which requires a firmware update to fix (made even worse by the fact that AMD are awful at providing fixes in the first place)
Only the really big names like Intel, Dell, HP... but even then they'll still go out of support eventually.
AMD are generally quick with providing microcode updates. Once they have them, they provide them to your motherboard manufacturer to include in a firmware update. This is the part that usually takes a while, if done at all.
What would you recommend as a schedule for "regularly"?
IMO, keep an rss feed of your vendors firmware updates being released on their website or periodically check it yourself. As soon as its released, go ahead and install it. If you want to be cautious, maybe give it a week or two to make sure they dont pull the update due to issues with that particular release.
Even better, if the manufacturer offers a utility to keep updates installed, just run that periodically.
I haven't discovered any manufacturer's RSS feed. Is that a common thing?
No idea. You can use something like jackett to generate an RSS feed for you if they dont have one.
Maybe they have a newsletter for updates, or a registration card, social media account, or maybe a security team that announces security updates.
All im suggesting is look into how your manufacturer announces these updates and actively listen to that communication.