Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

10
  • 1
    Have you tried using osslsigncode? I recall some versions of sbsign calculated whichever header parameters incorrectly. Commented Jun 13, 2020 at 19:04
  • @user1686 That's interesting. Thanks for the comment, I'm willing to try anything at this point. Commented Jun 13, 2020 at 19:17
  • @user1686 That did it! This wasn't mentioned anywhere in the guides I followed. Searching for "secure boot osslsigncode", I found linuxjournal.com/content/take-control-your-pc-uefi-secure-boot with a note at the bottom. You should post this as an answer. I might add a few notes to it if you do, but the credit is all yours. Thanks! Commented Jun 13, 2020 at 20:06
  • Note that keeping M$ keys doesn't make any sense if your intent was to control your owned hardware. Doing so allow anyone to gain administrative access to your machine eg. by booting from Windows installation media and hitting Shift-F10. In other words, keeping M$ keys make the whole point of using your own keys disappear.
    – Anthony
    Commented Jul 1, 2022 at 10:10
  • @Anthony Signing Microsoft's keys with my PK and installing them allows Windows to secure boot and function as normal (which I need in my situation). For a malicious UEFI binary to execute, which is the whole point, it has to be signed by either my DB key, or Microsoft's. Both scenarios are highly unlikely and would mean we have bigger issues. As far as physical access to the machine, that is a different attack vector altogether. Commented Jul 1, 2022 at 14:04