Can We Finally All Agree That UEFI 'Secure Boot' is a Sham That Harms Security and Gives Microsoft Remote Control Over All PCs and Servers (Even Those That Don't Run Any Microsoft Software)?
This past week: UEFI 'Secure Boot' is Not Security, Another Farce Demonstrated This Week | UEFI 'Secure Boot' Still Not Secure in 2026, New Holes (or Bypasses) Still Being Found | 'Secure' Boot Redundant and Only a Net Loss for Security
5 months ago the foremost booster of UEFI 'Secure Boot' petitioned to put my wife in prison, then he did not show up for his own hearing (despite visiting the UK at the time). Years ago he "invited" me to "debate" him regarding UEFI 'Secure Boot' in the US; I turned that down, citing his violent views, set aside the distance.
When it comes to UEFI 'Secure Boot', I hope the argument is already settled. Two summers ago UEFI 'Secure Boot' basically killed dual-boot for many users (exactly the sort of thing we've warned about since 2012). This month we discover yet another "black eye". UEFI 'Secure Boot' basically didn't offer any security at all, i.e. it was falsely advertised for well over a decade.
Cui bono? █