

I dunno, but you have facebook and that font installed on your phone, so Im suspicious of your claim.
I dunno, but you have facebook and that font installed on your phone, so Im suspicious of your claim.
Tor Network.
I2P.
Autonomi.
Gee, i wonder who is getting all that inflation money. Obviously not the workers.
If only we had a federal program whose focus was on providing food and necessities to those that are in need.
No, its still 45 days
Jesus, a torn cornea is no joke. I wonder if a medical doctor gave her that diagnosis or if Facebook did.
Holy…
1/3 of the entire company…
Im curious if the Russians do too
It would be a tragedy if it never came back up
Then tell Russia to end that war.
Turning off secure boot wont turn off your TPM, it just turns off all the signature verifications. Your TPM still stores the decryption keys and you can still decrypt your data.
Now if you do a UEFI/BIOS update without disabling your encryption while using a TPM, and dont have password decryption as a backup, yes, you could potentially lose access to your data.
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.
Sounds like the devs have spoken then.
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?
Nightmare material
No.
You want it, build it yourself. Or pay devs to do it.
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.
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.
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.
https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/24134-devices-lacking-standard-privacysecurity-patches-and-protections-arent-private