BIOS/Legacy vs. UEFI & Secure Boot

daankata · 2017-06-11 21:18:24

Hello!
I have searched a lot, including Arch Wiki articles about GRUB, Boot loaders, UEFI and etc. but still can't decide which one is better and why. Does UEFI has more security implications than BIOS/Legacy? Which one is more likely to avoid problems/bugs and why? The only advantage of UEFI I read is that it boots faster than BIOS/Legacy but that isn't important for me. I know Arch supports both, but which mode is more preferable for Arch? And finally what mode are you using and why?

Also does Secure Boot (which uses UEFI) ACTUALLY has some security implications or not, and can it affect the Arch system by any way?

I have an SSD, not larger than 2TiB, ThinkPad, I do not dual-boot with an other OS.

Thank you!

jasonwryan · 2017-06-11 21:41:59

You are using Arch. Why would you even consider legacy anything?

Read this: https://www.happyassassin.net/2014/01/2 … work-then/

Xabre · 2017-06-11 22:18:57

You don't really have a choice. Motherboard comes with either BIOS or UEFI. Not both.
UEFI motherboards have a legacy option because in the early days of UEFI many drivers had problems with it, so the compatibility mode that emulates BIOS was introduced. But it's still UEFI, it just acts like BIOS for the sake of avoiding some problems (that should not exist by now anyway).

Taijian · 2017-06-12 00:37:59

daankata wrote:

Also does Secure Boot (which uses UEFI) ACTUALLY has some security implications or not, and can it affect the Arch system by any way?

Well, it allows you to make your system more secure by enrolling your own keys and thus only allowing it to boot stuff that has been signed by you, thus mitigating one attack surface.

Arch Linux

#1 2017-06-11 21:18:24

BIOS/Legacy vs. UEFI & Secure Boot

#2 2017-06-11 21:41:59

Re: BIOS/Legacy vs. UEFI & Secure Boot

#3 2017-06-11 22:18:57

Re: BIOS/Legacy vs. UEFI & Secure Boot

#4 2017-06-12 00:37:59

Re: BIOS/Legacy vs. UEFI & Secure Boot

Board footer