ventoy maybe the image does not support x64 uefi

By

ventoy maybe the image does not support x64 uefinight clubs in grand baie, mauritius

@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? for the suggestions. Some commands in Ventoy grub can modify the contents of the ISO and must be disabled for users to use on their own under secure boot. You don't need anything special to create a UEFI bootable Arch USB. So, yeah, if you have access to to the hardware, then Secure Boot, TPM or whatever security measure you currently have on consumer-grade products, is pretty much useless because, as long as you can swap hardware components around, or even touch the hardware (to glitch the RAM for instance), then unless the TPM comes with an X-Ray machine that can scan and compare hardware components, you're going to have a very hard time plugging all the many holes through which a dedicated attacker can gain access to your data. https://github.com/ventoy/Ventoy/releases/tag/v1.0.33, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5NFuDCZQ00, http://tinycorelinux.net/13.x/x86_64/release/. plzz help. I will give more clear warning message for unsigned efi file when secure boot is enabled. Users can update Ventoy by installing the latest version or using VentoyU, a Ventoy updater utility. Maybe the image does not support X64 UEFI! Do I still need to display a warning message? Fix them with this tool: If the advices above haven't solved your issue, your PC may experience deeper Windows problems. Is Ventoy checking md5sums and refusing to load an iso that doesn't match or something? The iso image (prior to modification) works perfectly, and boots using Ventoy. For example, Ventoy can be modified to somehow chainload full chain of distros shim grub kernel, or custom validation functions could be made, which would, for example, validate and accept files signed with certificates in DB + a set of custom certificates (like ones embedded in distros' Shims), or even validate and automatically extract Shims embedded certificates and override EFI validation functions (as it's done currently to completely disable validation), but is this kind of complexity worth it for a USB boot utility which is implemented to be simple and convenient? Which is why you want to have as many of these enabled in parallel when they exist (such as TPM + Secure Boot, i.e. @BxOxSxS Please test these ISO files in Virtual Machine (e.g. Perform a scan to check if there are any existing errors on the USB. "No bootfile found for UEFI! You can reformat it with FAT32/NTFS/UDF/XFS/Ext2/Ext3/Ext4 filesystem, the only request is that Cluster Size must greater than or equal to 2048. I'll see if I can find some time in the next two weeks to play with your solution, but don't hold your breath. 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? fdisk: Create a primary partition with partition type EFI (FAT-12/16/32). It's the BIOS that decides the boot mode not Ventoy. No bootfile found for UEFI! Please thoroughly test the archive and give your feedback, what works and what don't. I can only see the UEFI option in my BIOS, even thought I have CSM (Legacy Compatibility) enabled. can u test ? For example, GRUB 2 is licensed under GPLv3 and will not be signed. privacy statement. Would be nice if this could be supported in the future as well. its existence because of the context of the error message. The program can be used to created bootable USB media from a variety of image formats, including ISO, WIM, IMG and VHD. In Windows, Ventoy2Disk.exe will only list the device removable and in USB interface type by default. Have a question about this project? Feedback is welcome If your tested hardware or image file is not listed here, please tell me and I will be glad to add it to the table here. Menu. If you use Rufus to write the same ISO file to the same USB stick and boot in your computer. Already on GitHub? The only way to prevent misuse when booting from USB is to set a BIOS password (and perhaps a boot password), set the BIOS to not boot from USB and it won't hurt to also use an encrypted filesystem for the OS on the hard disk (bitlocker/LUKS). That's actually very hard to do, and IMO is pointless in Ventoy case. It looks like that version https://github.com/ventoy/Ventoy/releases/tag/v1.0.33 fixes issue with my thinkpad. I've already disabled secure boot. Yes. @ventoy Fedora/Ubuntu/xxx). - . So if the ISO doesn't support UEFI mode itself, the boot will fail. Open net installer iso using archive manager in Debian (pre-existing system). I checked and they don't work. Say, we disabled validation policy circumvention and Secure Boot works as it should. 4. For the two bugs. If you burn the image to a CD, and use a USB CD drive, I bet you find it will install fine. I think it's ok as long as they don't break the secure boot policy. to your account, MB: GA-P110-D3, CPU: Intel Core i5 6400, RAM: 8GB DDR4, GPU: IGFX + NVIDIA GT730, MB: GA-H81M-S2PV, CPU : Intel Core i3 4650, RAM 8GB DDR3 GPU: IGFX, slitaz-rolling-core-5in1.iso 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 ubuntu-20.10-desktop-amd64.iso everything is fine If instead I try to install the ISO ubuntu-22.04.1-desktop-amd64.iso I get the following error message: "No bootfile found for UEFI! It means that the secure boot solution doesn't work with your machine, so you need to turn off the option, and disable secure boot in the BIOS. So as @pbatard said, the secure boot solution is a stopgap and that's why Ventoy is still at 1.0.XX. Where can I download MX21_February_x64.iso? Must hardreset the System. DSAService.exe (Intel Driver & Support Assistant). I'll think about it and try to add it to ventoy. # Archlinux minimal Install with btrfs ## Introduction If you don't know about Arch Linux, and willing to learn, then check this post, - [Arch Linux](https://wiki . Ventoy virtualizes the ISO as a cdrom device and boot it. Maybe we should just ask the user 'This file is not signed by Microsoft for 'Secure Boot' - do you still wish to boot from it?' It woks only with fallback graphic mode. list vol - select vol of EFI (in my case nr 14) as illustrated - assign - EFI drive is mounted as Q: Also possible is: After booting with Win10XPE from RAMDISK the Hidden EFI Driv This file is not signed by Microsoft for 'Secure Boot' - do you still wish to boot from it? 3. Just create a FAT32 partition, change its label to ARCH_YYYYMM (fill in the ISO's date, now it would be ARCH_202109) and extract the Arch ISO to it. The live folder is similar to Debian live. Error message: If I am using Ventoy and I went the trouble of enrolling it for Secure Boot, I don't expect it to suddenly flag any unsigned or UEFI bootloader or bootloader with a broken signature, as bootable in a Secure Boot enabled environment. Hiren's BootCD downloaded from: http://old-dos.ru/dl.php?id=15030. Help !!!!!!! My guesd is it does not. Already have an account? UEFi64? And for good measure, clone that encrypted disk again. Therefore, unless Ventoy makes it very explicit that "By enrolling Ventoy for Secure Boot, you understand that you are also granting anyone with the capability of running non Secure Boot enabled boot loaders on your computer, including potential malicious ones that would otherwise have been detected by Secure Boot", I will maintain that there is a rather important security issue that needs to be addressed. 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. It also happens when running Ventoy in QEMU. Legacy? I've been trying to do something I've done a milliion times before: This has always worked for me. And of course, people expect that if they run UEFIinSecureBoot or similar software, whose goal is explicitly stated as such, it will effectively remove Secure Boot. Any way to disable UEFI booting capability from Ventoy and only leave legacy? 1.0.84 UEFI www.ventoy.net ===> Do I still need to display a warning message? Just right-click on "This PC" on the desktop, select "Manage", and click on "Disk Management . What matters is what users perceive and expect. @steve6375 Windows 11 21h2 x64 Hebrew - Successfully tested on UFEI. You can press left or right arrow keys to scroll the menu. size: 589 (617756672 byte) Probably you didn't delete the file completely but to the recycle bin. This means current is Legacy BIOS mode. Adding an efi boot file to the directory does not make an iso uefi-bootable. Maybe the image does not support X64 UEFI" hello everyone Using ventoy, if I try to install the ISO. Secure Boot is tricky to deal with and can (rightfully) be seen as a major inconvenience instead of yet another usually desireable line of defence against malware (but by all means not a panacea). I remember that @adrian15 tried to create a sets of fully trusted chainload chains The best workaround is to install some Linux variant (I use Fedora but Ubuntu and SUSE are supported) and install VirtualBox. Download non-free firmware archive. Remove the Windows 7 installation CD/DVD from the disc tray, type exit in Command Prompt and press Enter. slax 15.0 boots Will there be any? Insert a USB flash drive with at least 8 GB of storage capacity into your computer. V4 is legacy version. 04-23-2021 02:00 PM. If you allow someone physical access to your Secure Boot-enabled system, and you have not disabled USB booting in the BIOS (or booting from CD\DVD), then there is no point in implementing a USB-based Secure Boot loader. This iso seems to have some problem with UEFI. DiskGenius Still having issues? Maybe the image does not support x64 uefi. I'm not talking about CSM. Thank you both for your replies. Does it work on these machines (real or emulated) by booting it from a CDR / .iso image? Passware.Kit.Forensic.2017.1.1.Win.10-64bit.BootCD.iso - 350 MB Snail LInux , supports UEFI , booting successfully. 1.0.84 IA32 www.ventoy.net ===> Remain what in the install program Ventoy2Disk.exe . Ventoy is an open source tool to create a bootable USB drive for ISO/WIM/IMG/VHD (x)/EFI files. your point) and you also want them to actually do their designated job, including letting you know, if you have Secure Boot enabled, when some third party UEFI boot loader didn't pass Secure Boot validation, even if that boot loader will only ever be run from someone who has to have physical access to your computer in the first place. However what currently happens is that people who do have Secure Boot enabled will currently not be alerted to these at all. Boots, but unable to find its own files; specifically, does not find boot device and waits user input to find its root device. This disk, after being installed on a USB flash drive and booted from, effectively disables Secure Boot protection features and temporary allows to perform almost all actions with the PC as if Secure Boot is disabled. For more information on how to download and install Ventoy on Windows 10/11, we have a guide for that. 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 seem to be disabled in Ventoy's custom GRUB). Have you tried grub mode before loading the ISO? The boot.wim mode appears to be over 500MB. Strelec WinPE) Ctrl+r for ventoy debug mode Ctrl+h or h for help m checksum a file No bootfile found for UEFI! I can confirm it was the reason for some ISOs to not boot (ChimeraOS, Manjaro Gnome). check manjaro-gnome, not working. This option is enabled by default since 1.0.76. i was test in VMWare 16 for rufus, winsetupusb, yumiits okay, https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_mYChRFanLEdyttDvT-cn6zH0o6KX7Th/view?usp=sharing. The point is that if a user whitelists Ventoy using MokManager, they are responsible for anything that they then subsequently run using Ventoy. Fedora-Security-Live-x86_64-Rawhide-20200526.n.0 - 1.95 GB, guix-system-install-1.1.0.x86_64-linux.iso - 550 MB, ipfire-2.25.x86_64-full-core143.iso - 280 MB, SpringdaleLinux-8.1-x86_64-netinst.iso - 580 MB, Acronis.True.Image.2020.v24.6.1.25700.Boot.CD.iso - 690 MB, O-O.BlueCon.Admin.17.0.7024.WinPE.iso - 480 MB, adelie-live-x86_64-1.0-rc1-20200202.iso - 140 MB, fhclive-USB-2019.02_kernel-4.4.178_amd64.iso - 450 MB, MiniTool.Partition.Wizard.Technician.WinPE.11.5.iso - 390 MB, AOMEI.Backupper.Technician.Plus.5.6.0_UEFI.iso - 380 MB, O-O.DiskImage.Professional.14.0.321.WinPE.iso - 380 MB, EaseUS.Data.Recovery.Wizard.WinPE.13.2.iso - 390 MB, Active.Boot.Disk.15.0.6.x64.WinPE.iso - 400 MB, Active.Data.Studio.15.0.0.Boot.Disk.x64.iso - 550 MB, EASEUS.Partition.Master.13.5.Technician.Edition.WinPE.x64.iso - 500 MB, Macrium_Reflect_Workstation_PE_v7.2.4797.iso - 280 MB, Paragon.Hard.Disk.Manager.Advanced.17.13.1.x64.WinPE.iso - 400 MB, Passware.Kit.Forensic.2017.1.1.Win.10-64bit.BootCD.iso - 350 MB, orel-2.12.22-26.12.2019_13.14.livecd.iso - 1.1 GB, rocksolid-signage-release-installer-1.13.4-1.iso - 1.3 GB, manjaro-kde-20.0-rc3-200422-linux56.iso - 3 GB, OpenStage-2020.03-xfce4-x86_64.iso - 1.70 GB, resilientlinux-installer-amd64-2.2.iso - 2.20 GB, virage-beowulf-3.0-x86-64-UEFI-20191110_1146.iso - 1.30 GB, BlackWeb-Unleashed.19.11-amd64.hybrid.iso - 3 GB, yunohost-stretch-3.6.4.6-amd64-stable.iso - 400 MB, OpenMandrivaLx.4.2-snapshot-plasma.x86_64.iso - 2.10 GB This option is enabled by default since 1.0.76. @shasheene of Rescuezilla knows about the problem and they are investigating. So all Ventoy's behavior doesn't change the secure boot policy. Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community. document.getElementById( "ak_js_1" ).setAttribute( "value", ( new Date() ).getTime() ); If you have a tech problem, we probably covered it! I have this same problem. The file size will be over 5 GB. That's because, if they did want to boot non Secure Boot enabled ones, they would disable Secure Boot themselves. unsigned kernel still can not be booted. and that is really the culmination of a process that I started almost one year ago. However the solution is not perfect enough. I think it's OK. Ventoy can detect GRUB inside ISO file, parse its configuration file and load its boot elements directly, with "linux" GRUB kernel loading command. I will test it in a realmachine later. Because if I know you ever used Ventoy in a Secure Boot enabled environment, I can now run any malicious payload I want at the UEFI level, on your computer. If someone has physical access to a system and that system is enabled to boot from a USB drive, then all they need to do is boot to an OS such as Ubuntu or WindowsPE or WindowsToGo from that USB drive (these OS's are all signed and so will Secure boot). (Haswell Processor) Tested in Memdisk and normal mode with 1.0.08b2. , ctrl+alt+del . You can change the type or just delete the partition. 1. may tanong po ulit ako yung pc ko po " no bootfile found for uefi image does not support x64 uefi" i am using ventoy galing po sa linux ko, gusto ko po isang laptop ko gawin naman windows, ganyan po lagi naka ilang ulit na po ako, laptop ko po kasi ayaw na bumalik sa windows mula nung ginawa ko syang linux, nagtampo siguro kaya gusto ko na po ibalik sa windows salamat po sa makakasagot at sa . The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: Please test this ISO file with VirtualMachine(e.g. preloader-for-ventoy-prerelease-1.0.40.zip Option2: Use Ventoy's grub which is signed with MS key. Format UDF in Windows: format x: /fs:udf /q Thanks very much for proposing this great OS , tested and added to report. Ventoy should only allow the execution of Secure Boot signed executables when Secure Boot is enabled, Microsoft's official Secure Boot signing requirements. Secure Boot is supported since Ventoy-1.0.07, please use the latest version and see the Notes. For instance, if you download a Windows or Linux ISO, you sure want to find out if someone altered the official bootloader, that was put there by the people who created the ISO, because it might tell you if something was maliciously inserted there. Set the VM to UEFI mode and connect the ISO file directly to the VM and boot. Maybe the image does not support X64 UEFI. 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. All the .efi/kernel/drivers are not modified. You signed in with another tab or window. That is the point. Openbsd is based. I downloaded filename Win10_21H2_BrazilianPortuguese_x64.iso Also tested on Lenovo IdeaPad 300 16GB OK (UEFI64). But, UEFI:NTFS is not a SHIM and that's actually the reason why it could be signed by Microsoft (once I switched the bootloader license from GPLv3+ to GPLv2+ and rewrote a UEFI driver derived from GPLv2+ code, which I am definitely not happy at all about), because, in a Secure Boot enabled environment, it can not be used to chain load anything that isn't itself Secure Boot signed. I can provide an option in ventoy.json for user who want to bypass secure boot. Currently there is only a Secure boot support option for check. So from ventoy 1.0.09, an option for secure boot is added in Ventoy2Disk.exe/Ventoy2Disk.sh and default is disabled. It only causes problems. Win10_1909_Chinese(Simplified)_x64.iso: Works fine, all hard drive can be properly detected. Personally, I don't have much of an issue with Ventoy using the current approach as a stopgap solution, as long as it is agreed that this is only a stopgap, since it comes with a huge drawback, and that a better solution (validation of that the UEFI bootloaders chain loaded from GRUB pass Secure Boot validation when Secure Boot has been enabled by the user) needs to be implemented in the long run. Thnx again. WinPE10_8_Sergei_Strelec_x86_x64_2019.12.28_English.iso BOOT but Custom launcher cannot open custom path and unable access to special apps. Adding an efi boot file to the directory does not make an iso uefi-bootable. 2. It was working for hours before finally failing with a non-specific error. a media that was created without using Ventoy) running in a Secure Boot environment, so if your point is that because Ventoy uses a means to inject content that Microsoft has chosen not to secure, it makes the whole point of checking Secure Boot useless, then that reasoning logically also applies to official unmodified retail Windows ISOs, because you might as well tell everyone who created a Windows installation media (using the MCT for instance): "There's really no point in having Secure Boot enabled on your system, since someone can just create a Windows media with a malicious Windows\System32\winpeshl.exe payload to compromise your system at early boottime anyway" Again, if someone has Secure Boot enabled, and did not whitelist a third party UEFI bootloader themselves, then they will expect the system to warn them in that third party bootloader fails Secure Boot validation, regardless of whether they did enrol a bootloader that chain loaded that third party bootloader. Therefore, Ventoy/Grub should be altered as follows: Hopefully this shouldn't be too complex to add, though it may require some research, and modifying GRUB to do just that might require a lot of work. Option 1: Completly by pass the secure boot like the current release. Would MS sign boot code which can change memory/inject user files, write sectors, etc.? It was actually quite the struggle to get to that stage (expensive too!) 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). Option 3: only run .efi file with valid signature. Sorry for the late test. Yes, I finally managed to get UEFI:NTFS Secure Boot signed 2 days ago, and that's part of why there's a new release of Rufus today, that includes the signed version of UEFI:NTFS. 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. plist file using ProperTree. Indeed I have erroneously downloaded memtest v4 because I just read ".iso" and went for it. All the .efi/kernel/drivers are not modified. Just like what is the case with Ventoy, I don't have much of an issue with having some leeway, on account that implementing proper signature validation requires some effort, during which unsigned bootloaders may be accepted, so as not inconvenience users too much. Currently when boot the ISO file failed as a Virtual CDROM, Ventoy will try to parse the grub configuration file inside the ISO file and try to boot it direclty with. *lil' bow* Besides, I'm considering that: Error description Single x64 ISO - OK - Works and install.esd found by Setup - all Editions listed Dual 32+64 ISO - FAIL - Did not find install.esd file (either 64 or 32) \x64\sources\ and \x32\sources in ISO UEFI64 Boot: Single x64 ISO - FAIL - 'No boot file found by UEFI' ' Maybe the image does not support X64 UEFI!' and select the efisys.bin from desktop and save the .iso Now the Minitool.iso should boot into UEFI with Ventoy. Its ok. Happy to be proven wrong, I learned quite a bit from your messages. 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. As Ventoy itself is not signed with Microsoft key. So the new ISO file can be booted fine in a secure boot enviroment. Passware Kit Forensic , on Legacy mode booting successfully but on UEFI returns to Ventoy. You signed in with another tab or window. No, you don't need to implement anything new in Ventoy. Forum rules Before you post please read how to get help. 6. By clicking Sign up for GitHub, you agree to our terms of service and https://abf.openmandriva.org/product_build_lists. edited edited edited edited Sign up for free . What exactly is the problem? But that not means they trust all the distros booted by Ventoy. Users may run into issues with Ventoy not working because of corrupt ISO files, which will create problems when booting an image file. Of course, there are ways to enable proper validation. Any progress towards proper secure boot support without using mokmanager? This will disable validation policy override, making Secure Book work as desired: it will load only signed files (+ files signed with SHIM MOK key). If you pull the USB drive out immediately after finish copy a big ISO file, most probably the file in the USB will be corrupted. 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 user could choose to run a Microsoft Windows Install ISO downloaded from the MS servers and Ventoy could inject a malicious file into it as it boots. unsigned kernel still can not be booted. All the .efi files may not be booted. This completely defeats Secure Boot and should not happen, as the only EFI bootloader that should be whitelisted for Secure Boot should be Ventoy itself, and any other EFI bootloader should still be required to pass Secure Boot validation. I cannot boot into Ventoy with Secure Boot enabled on my machine though, it only boots when I disable Secure Boot in BIOS. However, considering that in the case of Ventoy, you are basically going to chain load GRUB 2, and that most of the SHIMs have been designed to handle precisely that, it might be easier to get Ventoy accepted as a shim payload. This was not considered Secure Boot violation as ExitBootServices() was called prior to booting the kernel. The only thing that changed is that the " No bootfile found for UEFI!" Win10UEFI+GPTWin10UEFIWin7 So maybe Ventoy also need a shim as fedora/ubuntu does. Thanks a lot. Guid For Ventoy With Secure Boot in UEFI 1All the steps bellow only need to be done once for each computer when booting Ventoy at the first time. Users have been encountering issues with Ventoy not working or experiencing booting issues. Results when tested on different models\types of x86 computers - amount of RAM, make/model, latest BIOS? debes desactivar secure boot en el bios-uefi 10 comments andycuong commented on Mar 17, 2021 completed meeuw mentioned this issue on Jul 31, 2021 [issue]: Can't boot Ventoy UEFI Native (Without CSM) on HP ProBook 640g1 #1031 That's an improvement, I guess? Ventoy loads Linux kernels directly, which are also signed with embedded Shim certificate (not with the certificate trusted by EFI DB). Yes ! Then the process of reading your "TPM-secured" disk becomes as easy as: User awareness that their encrypted data was read: Nil. It should be specially noted that, no matter USB drive or local disk, all the data will be lost after install Ventoy, please be very careful. That's actually the whole reason shims exist, because Microsoft forbade Linux people to get their most common UEFI boot manager signed for Secure Boot, so the Linux community was forced into creating a separate non GPLv3 boot loader that loads GRUB, and that can be signed for Secure Boot. . BUT with Ventoy 1.0.74 legacy boot from the same ISO I get a black square in centre of menu (USB LED is flashing so appears to load). error was now displayed in 1080p. Let us know in the comments which solution worked for you. Only in 2019 the signature validation was enforced. Ubuntu has shim which load only Ubuntu, etc. I'm afraid I'm very busy with other projects, so I haven't had a chance. By the way, since I do want to bring that message home for people who might be tempted to place a bit too much trust in TPMs, disk encryption and Secure Boot, what the NSA would most likely do, if they wanted to access your encrypted disk data on an x86 PC, is issue a secret executive order to Intel or AMD, to design special version of the CPU they need, where the serial can be altered programmatically (so that they can clone the serial from the original CPU in case the TPM checks it) and that includes additional logic and EPROM to detect and store the critical data (such as disk decryption keys) when accessed. I adsime that file-roller is not preserving boot parameters, use another iso creation tool. Any kind of solution? I'll test it on a real hardware a bit later. Earlier (2014-2019) official GRUB in Ubuntu and Debian allowed to boot any Linux kernel, even unsigned one, in Secure Boot mode. @ventoy I have tested on laptop Lenovo Ideapad Z570 and Memtest86-4.3.7.iso and ipxe.iso gived same error but with additional information: netboot.xyz-efi.iso (v2.0.17), manjaro-gnome-20.0.3-200606-linux56.iso, Windows10_PLx64_2004.iso worked fine. Use UltraISO for example and open Minitool.iso 4. size 5580453888 bytes (5,58 GB) And, unless you're going to stand behind every single Ventoy user to explain why you think it shouldn't matter that Ventoy will let any unsigned bootloader through, that's just not going to fly. But . If Secure Boot is not enabled, proceed as normal. By clicking Sign up for GitHub, you agree to our terms of service and Not associated with Microsoft. 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. You can install Ventoy to USB drive, Removable HD, SD Card, SATA HDD, SSD, NVMe . then there is no point in implementing a USB-based Secure Boot loader. en_windows_10_business_editions_version_1909_updated_april_2020_x64_dvd_aa945e0d.iso | 5 GB, en_windows_10_business_editions_version_2004_x64_dvd_d06ef8c5.iso | 5 GB Some bioses have a bug. Maybe because of partition type I was just objecting to your claim that Secure Boot is useless when someone has physical access to the device, which I don't think is true, as it is still (afaik) required for TPM-based encryption to work correctly. You can repair the drive or replace it. If anyone has an issue - please state full and accurate details. yes, but i try with rufus, yumi, winsetuptousb, its okay. I would assert that, when Secure Boot is enabled, every single time an unsigned bootloader is loaded, a warning message should be displayed. Minor one: when you try to start unsigned .efi executable, error message is shown for a very brief time and quickly disappears. 2. . How to make sure that only valid .efi file can be loaded.

Harry Wayne Casey Family, Is Esther Simplot Still Alive, New Castle Baseball, Articles V