Michael Devoe Parents, Articles V

2There are two methods: Enroll Key and Enroll Hash, use whichever one. if this issue was addressed), it could probably be Secure Boot signed, in the same manner as UEFI:NTFS was itself Secure Boot signed. 5. If the secure boot is enabled in the BIOS, the following screen should be displayed when boot Ventoy at thte first time. they reviewed all the source code). All the userspace applications don't need to be signed. Minor one: when you try to start unsigned .efi executable, error message is shown for a very brief time and quickly disappears. Do I still need to display a warning message? And, unfortunately, with Ventoy as it stands, this whole trust mechanism is indeed broken, because you can take an official Windows installation ISO, insert a super malicious UEFI bootloader (that performs a Windows installation while also installing malware) and, even if users have Secure Boot enabled (and added Ventoy in Mok manager), they will not be alerted at all that they are running a malicious bootloader, whereas this is the whole point of Secure Boot! slitaz-next-180716.iso, Symantec.Ghost.Boot.CD., regular-xfce-latest-x86_64.iso - 1.22 GB Users may run into issues with Ventoy not working because of corrupt ISO files, which will create problems when booting an image file. Hello , Thank you very very much for your testings and reports. Can't say for others, but I made Super UEFIinSecureBoot Disk with that exact purpose: to bypass Secure Boot validation policy. TinyCorePure64-13.1.iso does UEFI64 boot OK You need to create a directory with name ventoy and put ventoy.json in this directory(that is \ventoy\ventoy.json). Add firmware packages to the firmware directory. Sign in Sorry, I meant to upgrade from the older version of Windows 11 to 22H2. Ventoy can boot any wim file and inject any user code into it. @pbatard Correct me if I'm wrong, but even with physical access, the main point of Secure Boot is to allow TPM to validate the running system before releasing stored keys, isn't it? I have this same problem. @BxOxSxS Please test these ISO files in Virtual Machine (e.g. That's actually very hard to do, and IMO is pointless in Ventoy case. Rufus or WoeUSB, in several meaningful ways.The program does not extract ISO images or other image formats to the USB drive but . Keep reading to find out how to do this. The easiest thing to do if you don't have a UEFI-bootable Memtest86 ISO is to extract the \EFI\BOOT\BOOTX64.efi file and just copy that to your Ventoy drive. I downloaded filename Win10_21H2_BrazilianPortuguese_x64.iso You need to make the ISO UEFI64 bootable. But, just like GRUB, I assert that this matter needs to be treated as a bug that warrants fixing, which is the reason I created this issue in the first place. With that with recent versions, all seems to work fine. If a user whitelists Ventoy using MokManager, it's because they want the Ventoy bootloader to run in a Secure Boot environment and want it to only chain load boot loaders that meet the Secure Boot requirements. It was working for hours before finally failing with a non-specific error. It also happens when running Ventoy in QEMU. It's what Secure Boot is designed to do on account of being a trust chain mechanism that, when enabled, MUST alert if trust is broken. Ventoy's boot menu is not shown but with the following grub shell. Tried it yesterday. *lil' bow* Test these ISO files with Vmware firstly. To create a USB stick that is compatible with USB 3.0 using the native boot experience of the Windows 10 Technical Preview media (or Windows 8/Windows 8.1), use DiskPart to format the USB stick and set the partition to active, then copy all of the files from inside the ISO . Ventoy up to 1.0.12 used the /dev/mapper/ventoy approach to boot. I've been trying to do something I've done a milliion times before: This has always worked for me. But, even as I don't actually support the idea that Secure Boot is useless if someone has physical access to the device (that was mostly Steve positing this as a means to justify that not being able to detect Secure Boot breaches on USB media isn't that big a deal), I do believe there currently still exist a bit too many ways to ensure that you can compromise a machine, if you have access to said machine. In WIMBOOT mode (ctrl+w) I get 'Loading files. xx%' and then screen resolution changes and get nice Windows Setup GUI. and leave it up to the user. eficompress infile outfile. As Ventoy itself is not signed with Microsoft key, it uses Shim from Fedora (or, more precisely, from Super UEFIinSecureBoot Disk). No bootfile found for UEFI! Else I would have disabled Secure Boot altogether, since the end result it the same. Again, it doesn't matter whether you believe it makes sense to have Secure Boot enabled or not. Now, if Microsoft finally relinquished their abusive policy about not accepting GPLv3 code for Secure Boot signing and Ventoy was updated not to allow unsigned bootloaders when Secure Boot is enabled (i.e. puedes usar las particiones gpt o mbr. fails to find system in /slax, 'Hello System' os can boot successfully with bootx64.efi's machine and show desktop. Any suggestions, bugs? That is to say, a WinPE.iso or ubuntu.iso file can be booted fine with secure boot enabled(even no need for the user to whitelist them) but it may contain a malicious application in it. What system are you booting from? The boot.wim mode appears to be over 500MB. 1.0.84 MIPS www.ventoy.net ===> . OpenMandrivaLx.4.0-beta.20200426.7145-minimal.x86_64.iso - 400 MB, en_windows_10_business_editions_version_1909_updated_march_2020_x64_dvd_b193f738.iso | 5 GB In Linux, you need to specify the device to install Ventoy which can be a USB drive or local disk. Hi MFlisar , if you want use that now with HBCD you must extract the iso but the ventoy.dat on the root of the iso recreate the iso with example: ntlite oder oder tools and than you are able to boot from. If you use the Linux kernel's EFI stub loader or ELILO, you may need to store your kernel on the ESP, so creating an ESP on the large end of the scale is advisable. (I updated to the latest version of Ventoy). Already on GitHub? If you have a faulty USB stick, then youre likely to encounter booting issues. Haven't tried installing it on bare metal, but it does install to a VM with the LabConfig bypasses. This means current is Legacy BIOS mode. Thus, on a system where Secure Boot is enabled, users should rightfully expect to be alerted if the EFI bootloader of an ISO booted through Ventoy is not Secure Boot signed or if its signature doesn't validate. Latest Laptop UEFI 64+SECURE BOOT ON Blocked message. You signed in with another tab or window. But unless it exploits a Secure Boot vulnerability or limitation (or you get cozy with the folks controlling shim keys), that bootloader should require to be enrolled to pass Secure Boot validation, in the same manner as Ventoy does it. So from ventoy 1.0.09, an option for secure boot is added in Ventoy2Disk.exe/Ventoy2Disk.sh and default is disabled. My guess is it does not. How did you get it to be listed by Ventoy? The program can be used to created bootable USB media from a variety of image formats, including ISO, WIM, IMG and VHD. Then user will be clearly told that, in this case only distros whose bootloader signed with valid key can be loaded. No, you don't need to implement anything new in Ventoy. However, I guess it should be possible to automatically enroll ALL needed keys to shim from grub module on the first boot (when the user enrolls my ENROLL_THIS_CERT_INTO_MOKMANAGER.crt) and handle unsigned efi binaries as a special case or just require to sign them with user-generated key? This was not considered Secure Boot violation as ExitBootServices() was called prior to booting the kernel. They can choose to run a signed Ubuntu EFI file and Ventoy can change it's default function using scripts and file injection. @steve6375 Already have an account? Well occasionally send you account related emails. Ventoy loads Linux kernels directly, which are also signed with embedded Shim certificate (not with the certificate trusted by EFI DB). No bootfile found for UEFI! Ventoy 1.0.55 is available already for download. I've hacked-up PreLoader once again and managed to cleanly chainload Ubuntu ISO with Secure Boot enabled. About Fuzzy Screen When Booting Window/WinPE, Ventoy2Disk.exe can't enumerate my USB device. So it is impossible to get these ISOs to work with ventoy without enabling legacy support in the bios settings? This means current is UEFI mode. Ctrl+i to change boot mode of some ISOs to be more compatible Ctrl+w to use wimboot to boot Windows and WinPE ISOs (e.g. Have you tried grub mode before loading the ISO? Just found that MEMZ.iso from https://mega.nz/folder/TI8ECBKY#i89YUsA0rCJp9kTClz3VlA works, file: Windows XP.ver.SP3.English Link: https://www.mediafire.com/file/5zui8pq5p0p9zug/Windows10_SuperLite_TeamOS_Edition.iso/file There are also third-party tools that can be used to check faulty or fake USB sticks. Will polish and publish the code later. Error description After the reboot, select Delete MOK and click Continue. then there is no point in implementing a USB-based Secure Boot loader. I would say that it probably makes sense to first see what LoadImage()/StarImage() let through in an SB enabled environment (provided that this is what Ventoy/GRUB uses behind the scenes, which I'm not too sure about), and then decide if it's worth/possible to let users choose to run unsigned bootloaders. I adsime that file-roller is not preserving boot parameters, use another iso creation tool. Getting the same error with Arch Linux. With ventoy, you don't need to format the disk over and over, you just need to copy the ISO/WIM/IMG/VHD (x)/EFI. As Ventoy itself is not signed with Microsoft key. It typically has the same name, but you can rename it to something else should you choose to do so. Probably you didn't delete the file completely but to the recycle bin. This file is not signed by Microsoft for 'Secure Boot' - do you still wish to boot from it? There are many kinds of WinPE. Tried the same ISOs in Easy2Boot and they worked for me. In a real use case, when you have several Linux distros (not all of which have Secure Boot support), several unsigned UEFI utilities, it's just easier to temporary disable Secure Boot with SUISBD method. If you did the above as described, exactly, then you now have a good Ventoy install of latest version, but /dev/sdX1 will be type exFAT and we want to change that to ext4, so start gparted, find that partition (make sure it is unmounted via right click in gparted), format it to ext4 and make sure to . edited edited edited edited Sign up for free . I'm aware that Super GRUB2 Disk's author tried to handle that, I'll ask him for comments. But I was actually talking about CorePlus. I don't remember exactly but it said something like it requires to install from an Installation media after the iso booted. . 1.- comprobar que la imagen que tienes sea de 64 bits I tested it but trying to boot it will fail with an I/O error. I'm hoping other people can test and report because it will most likely be a few weeks before this can make it to the top of my priority list @ventoy, are you interested in a proper implementation of Secure Boot support? Ventoy can detect GRUB inside ISO file, parse its configuration file and load its boot elements directly, with "linux" GRUB kernel loading command. Can you add the exactly iso file size and test environment information? This will disable validation policy override, making Secure Book work as desired: it will load only signed files (+ files signed with SHIM MOK key). yes, but i try with rufus, yumi, winsetuptousb, its okay. So all Ventoy's behavior doesn't change the secure boot policy. This option is enabled by default since 1.0.76. EFI Blocked !!!!!!! You signed in with another tab or window. If Secure Boot is enabled, signature validation of any chain loaded, If the signature validation fails (i.e. Windows 7 32-bit does not support UEFI32 - you must use Win7 64-bit.. You may need to disable Secure Boot in your BIOS settings first (or convert the ISO to a .imgPTN23 file using the MPI Tool Kit). Won't it be annoying? and windows password recovery BootCD Now there's no need to format the disk again and again or to extract anything-- with Ventoy simply copy the ISO file to the USB drive and boot it. Now Rufus has achieved support for secure boot as now NTFS:UEFI Driver is signed for secure boot by Microsoft. It looks like that version https://github.com/ventoy/Ventoy/releases/tag/v1.0.33 fixes issue with my thinkpad. And that is the right thing to do. Format UDF in Windows: format x: /fs:udf /q SB works using cryptographic checksums and signatures. Tested on 1.0.57 and 1.0.79. It works for me if rename extension to .img - tested on a Lenovo IdeaPad 300. So use ctrl+w before selecting the ISO. 1. Yeah, I think UEFI LoadImage()/StarImage(), which is what you'd call to chain load the UEFI bootloader, are set to validate the loaded image for Secure Boot and not launch it for unsigned/broken images, if Secure Boot is enabled (but I admit I haven't formally validated that). chromeos_14816.99.0_reven_recovery_stable-channel_mp-v2.bin fails to boot on BIOS & UEFI. Is it valid for Ventoy to be able to run user scripts, inject user files into Linux/Windows ram disks, change .cfg files in 'secure' ISOs, etc. So maybe Ventoy also need a shim as fedora/ubuntu does. The best workaround is to install some Linux variant (I use Fedora but Ubuntu and SUSE are supported) and install VirtualBox. Newbie. Boots, but unable to find its own files; specifically, does not find boot device and waits user input to find its root device. I can 3 options and option 3 is the default. The current release of Slax (slax-64bit-11.2.1.iso) fails to boot using UEFI64 using ventoy with the error message: Ventoy Binary Notes: This website is underprovisioned, so please download ventoy in the follows: (remember to check the SHA-256 hash) https://github.com/ventoy/Ventoy/releases Source Code Ventoy's source code is maintained on both Github and Gitee. So that means that Ventoy will need to use a different key indeed. Okay, I installed linux mint 64 bit on this laptop before. openSUSE-Tumbleweed-KDE-Live-x86_64-Snapshot20200326-Media.iso - 952MB V4 is legacy version. Remove Ventoy secure boot key. I should also note that the key used in Ventoy is the same used in Super UEFIinSecureBoot Disk, my key. FFS I just spent hours reinstalling arch just to get this in the end archlinux-2021.06.01-x86_64.iso with Ventoy 1.0.47 boots for me on Lenovo IdeaPad 300 UEFI64 boot. @adrian15, could you tell us your progress on this? In this case, only these distros that bootx64.efi was signed with MS's key can be booted.(e.g. And if you somehow let bootloaders that shouldn't be trusted through, such as unsigned ones, then it means your whole chain of trust is utterly broken, because there simply cannot even exist a special case for "USB" vs "something else". The current Secure Boot implementation should be renamed from "Secure Boot support" to "Secure Boot circumvention/bypass", the documentation should state about its pros and cons, and Ventoy should probably ask to delete enrolled key (or at least include KeyTool, it's open-source). Sorry for my ignorance. Delete or rename the \EFI folder on the VTOYEFI partition 2 of the Ventoy drive. This solution is only for Legacy BIOS, not UEFI. 1.0.84 BIOS www.ventoy.net ===> I have installed Ventoy on my USB and I have added some ISO's files : They boot from Ventoy just fine. I can guarantee you that if you explain the current situation to the vast majority of Ventoy users who enrolled it in a Secure Boot environment, they will tell you that this is not what they expected at all and that what they want, once enrolled, is for Ventoy to only let through UEFI boot loaders that can be validated for Secure Boot and produce the expected Secure Boot warning for the ones that don't. The main issue is that users should at least get some warning that a bootloader failed SB validation when SB is enabled, instead of just letting everything go through. And IMO, anything that attempts to push the idea that, maybe, allowing silent boot of unsigned bootloaders is not that bad, is actually doing a major disservice to users, as it does weaken the security of their system and, if this is really what a user wants, they can and should disable Secure Boot.