I’ve seen people advocating for both options, but since I’m still new to Linux I’m not sure what to do. I’m currently installing Mint on my laptop to try it out, and I’m not sure if I should enable secure boot or not.
It’s a layer of security. Keep it on when you can. If you have issues doing something, then turn it off (and see if you can turn it back on afterward).
If you want extra security turn it on or you want windows or any game (looking at you vanguard)to shutup about security boot being off
The only problem with security boot if you care about this is that it’s managed by Microsoft(most of the time)Secure boot has always caused me headaches in the past.
If you want the extra security, go for it. If you don’t care, turn it off.
@ArchmageAzor secure boot is very low on your priorities. Start with FDE (full disk encryption). This should be the default in all Linux distros
If you do, then also choose full-disk encryption. It doesn’t make sense to close a small hole only to leave the big one gaping wide open. And yet on Linux FDE is mostly off by default, even in today’s era of encryption, even on laptops. Personally I don’t understand it.
Once you’re encrypted, then Secure Boot (if you even have the option of it) mitigates against the “evil maid attack”. To get access to your encrypted computer, the attacker will need physical access to it twice: first to swap out the bootloader, then to harvest the password you unsuspectingly passed to their freshly installed malware.
For most targets (i.e. you, probably), this would all be far too much trouble. But technically it closes a loophole: it means that you can go to Russia as a spy or a journalist and not have to carry your laptop on your person at all times.
I use Linux Mint and I disabled it because it was blocking the nvidia driver from initiating. I’m sure I could fix it, but can’t be arsed to.
Yeah not sure how it works on Mint, on OpenSUSE after reboot it asks if you want to enroll the new keys into it. If you miss the timer you will boot and driver will bork
Secure boot is a good thing. It’s a security feature. You want it on whenever possible, unless it’s a huge trouble (like if you have to start manually signing your own keys and adding them to the bios).
Edit: added the word manually
I turn it off during OS install then turn it on after usually. If you want to run VMs sometimed youll have to sign your own keys and annoying stuff like that but you can always just go into BIOS and turn it off anytime anyway.
Its main purpose is to prevent malware from booting. In my experience its main purpose seems to be preventing me from booting things I want like ventoy flash drives, nvidia drivers, and Linux distros that don’t support it. Same goes for tpm module. Its main purpose seemed to be the switch keeping win 10 from upgrading. I turned them both off and haven’t felt the strong need to turn them back on yet.
That said, and my bad computing habits aside, you probably should turn them ON. I’m not sure they will do all that much realistically speaking, but if it isn’t getting in your way (and it shouldn’t), then ON isn’t a bad default state to be in.
On!
If your linux OS supports secure boot then it does help improve security.
The differing opinions on it are often because it can cause issues in some set ups and in a default set up its only a marginal security gain.
It will add a layer of security at boot by preventing 3rd party unauthenticated processes / software from running and creates a secure boot chain from your BIOS up to the OS. But the default set up also means other authenticated OSes like Windows can be run, so its not as secure as it could be.
To really secure it you could create your own keys and then only your OS could boot. But as a linux newbie thats likely way more than you need and there are risks if you fuck up, to the point of accidentally locking you out of your own machine
So your choice is really just the default set up being on or off. On is a bit more secure but if you experience any issues then turn it off and don’t worry about it.
I was looking for an official documentation entry on this matter to share with OP, ideally something centralized like Fedora’s RPM Fusion or the comprehensive Arch Wiki. While I found various user-created resources, I was surprised not to locate a centralized official documentation page addressing this topic. I’m quite familiar with Linux Mint’s user-friendly approach, so perhaps I’ve overlooked something? I’d be genuinely delighted if someone could point me to such a resource, as it would be tremendously helpful not just for OP but for the community as a whole.
Debian has a good page on it and how their set up works:
https://wiki.debian.org/SecureBoot
Edit: Ubuntu is derived from Debian and then Mint from Ubuntu, but they may have their own differing approachsnto secure boot.
If you aren’t sure, install with secure boot off. If you like adventure, install with secure boot on and see if secure boot causes problem or not. If yes, then install with secure boot off
i turned it on mine. Running linux mint and windows 10 ltsc on seperate hard disk. Havent turn into any problem so far.
If you’re not actually going to be engaging in securing anything with it, just leave it off to avoid issues.
Linux supports secure boot so if a distro supports it it’s worth using it.
Linux can use a key signed by Microsoft in a preboot loader and then itself perform its own key authentications for all other processes and software (a shim), forming a secure chain from the BIOS up during boot. You dont have to play with creating your own keys.
So if your OS supports secure boot it is worth using it for added security at boot. Its far from perfect in this set up (as there are plenty of windows OS that also have permission to boot) but it is better than a free for all without it even if the risk is low for most desktop users.
You can go further and generate your own keys and use secure boot and TPM together to lock down the system further but you dont have to to get some benefits from secure boot.
That’s not the question though. This is an average user installing Mint. They’re probably not enrolling disk encryption with TPM values or SB certs, they’re literally asking if it’s going to help them by default, and the answer is no. Now, if they were asking how they could increase system security with Secure Boot, I’d answer differently.
Dumb ass advice.
Lol, explain how? Are you using TPM values to actually secure anything? If not, then it’s literally doing nothing for you.
Its not doing nothing. Linux uses a Microsoft provided key for initial BIOS authentication and then has its own tree of keys that it uses for security. So it does have the benefits of locking out malicious code/processes evenninna default set up.
Using your own secure boot and TPM keys is certainly more secure, but it doesnt follow that secure boot with the default set up is doing nothing to help secure your system at boot.
No idea where you got this understanding from, but it’s not accurate. In your example, if a distro has signed binaries, then it will work to verify code loaded during the boot process to help to verify system integrity. As OP asked about Mint, yes it technically does have signed pre boot and boot signed modules.
No, this will not prevent all code/processes that aren’t signed from running. That’s a ludicrous statement. It will prevent unsigned kernel modules from being loaded (see Nvidia’s MOK process), and it will prevent a disk from being hit with sideload attacks perhaps (it should be encrypted anyway), but it absolutely does not prevent a user from running unsigned code, or even using root privs to run harmful code (like running random scripts from GitHub).
So at the end of the day does it help a standard user with security? I would argue no. As I said elsewhere, if this question were about HOW to improve security with SB, I’d have a different answer, but that’s not the question OP asked.
You don’t know what you are talking about
