Rufus reports revoked Bootloader?

[theroar84]

I have used Fossa64 a ton. Just tried CA using a CD, but thought I would try USB too.

When I added the F96_CE_4 iso to Rufus it showed this warning message. Should I be switching to Bookworm? I made a USB with the latest iso of that and did not get a warning. Thanks in advance!

[bigpup]

This is not quotes specifically from Puppy Linux, but the info does apply.

Why does Rufus display a warning message about revoked UEFI bootloaders?

️ Important: Rufus 4.2.4070 Beta introduced a feature to the software to display a warning about revoked UEFI bootloaders, "Add detection and warning for UEFI revoked bootloaders (including ones revoked through SkuSiPolicy.p7b)." This will cause Rufus to display a warning message.

Why can't we have a secure boot compatible solution in Rufus?

The reason why we can't have a Secure Boot compatible solution in Rufus is because Microsoft have arbitrarily decided that they would not sign anything GPLv3, and we are currently using a GPLv3 UEFI driver (which we derived from the GRUB project).

Microsoft, which seems to have total control of this secure boot stuff.
They keep changing the requirements for using secure boot and it never benefits any operating systems, that are not Microsoft Windows!

Will have to try using the latest version of Rufus and install the latest version of BookwormPup64 to see what happens.

Puppy is not going to have the latest requirements, in the very newest UEFI bios firmware (very newest computers), for secure boot enabled.
For years people have been using Puppy Linux with secure boot disabled.
Me included.
Never had an issue with this.

I would just click on OK for the warning and continue the install.
See if the install it does will boot.

[wizard]

@theroar84

First, make sure you downloaded the ISO from the link in the forum.

If you are not using secure boot.or using Grub4dos you can certainly disregard the message.

This warning applies to MS Windows users and relates to the BlackLotus UEFI vulnerability. This quote from a web search:

No, BlackLotus does not target Linux:

No Linux-targeting variant
BlackLotus is a malware that targets Microsoft Windows OS software, and no Linux-targeting variant has been observed.

@bigpup is correct, just click OK.

wizard

[mikewalsh]

@theroar84 :-

Either do as stated above, or instead use UNetbootin. (I would say Balena Etcher, too - both of these have Windows ports - except for the fact that Etcher has never worked for us, due to Puppy's unique method of operation).

UNetbootin WILL produce a bootable Puppy. Wizard and I have proved this, on multiple occasions.....and, like as not, others have too. We can effectively guarantee this one's success rate.

UNetbootin at Github.io

There's a couple of minor 'hiccups' that are easily fixed. It requires the installation of mtools if used in Linux, and may need its hand "forcing" to "see" the specific drive you want to use.....but these are simple to sort out. I have to assume the Windows port will just work. Couldn't say; never tried it. Haven't had Windows in this house for over a decade.....and don't miss it, either. (Except for it being a "good miss"! )

Mike.

[dimkr]

Puppy is not going to have the latest requirements, in the very newest UEFI bios firmware (very newest computers), for secure boot enabled.

This is very gentle way of saying Puppy doesn't support Secure Boot at all

Puppy never went through the process of submitting a boot loader for Microsoft to sign (like pretty much all other distros) and it probably can't because it doesn't have a single "developer" and a secure, central build server that produces all releases and can sign them with a well-protected key. A malicious actor that gets Microsoft's stamp of approval can break Secure Boot for everyone, so I'm not optimistic about Secure Boot support in Puppy in the future.

[stevie pup]

UNetbootin WILL produce a bootable Puppy. Wizard and I have proved this, on multiple occasions.....and, like as not, others have too. We can effectively guarantee this one's success rate.

I'll second that. Just recently I've had more success booting Puppies with Unetbootin than by any other method.

There's a couple of minor 'hiccups' that are easily fixed. It requires the installation of mtools if used in Linux, and may need its hand "forcing" to "see" the specific drive you want to use.....but these are simple to sort out.

I use Unetbootin on MX Linux, and I haven't had any of these "hiccups".

[wizard]

@mikewalsh

It requires the installation of mtools

Although you will get a message about "mtools", it is not required and you can just ignore the message.

Thanks
wizard

[bugnaw333]

Unetbootin for Windows is OK also to be used... I have tried it and showed good results on puppy isos.

[mikewalsh]

@wizard :-

@mikewalsh

It requires the installation of mtools

Although you will get a message about "mtools", it is not required and you can just ignore the message.

Thanks
wizard

Hm. I've always found that if I don't install mtools from the PPM, it refuses to run. Mind you, these ARE usually older Puppies. Maybe the newer crop of modern Pups have mtools included OOTB.

@stevie pup :-

As for "forcing its hand", I had to do this with the old Compaq rig. It had a built-in multi-card reader that hadn't worked for years, and which I couldn't be bothered to remove.....and which consistently occupied the same 3 mount-points immediately above the internal drives. For some reason, UNetbootin would NOT "see" anything mounted at a mount-point above these, so we figured out a simple way to "point" it at the specific drive mount-point I wanted to use, making use of one of its built-in options.

Mike.

[wizard]

@mikewalsh

I've always found that if I don't install mtools from the PPM, it refuses to run. Mind you, these ARE usually older Puppies.

Could be, Bionic32 would be the oldest test for mine.

Thanks
wizard

[theroar84]

Thanks for all the fantastic info! I always appreciate the assistance.

As far as the download, I grabbed CE from ibiblio directly. It would have been smarter to have used the links here.

The links on the https://puppylinux-woof-ce.github.io/ were not functioning correctly that day. Everything is working fine today though.