fool@programming.dev to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 2 months agoof=/dev/sdaprogramming.devimagemessage-square68fedilinkarrow-up1564arrow-down115
arrow-up1549arrow-down1imageof=/dev/sdaprogramming.devfool@programming.dev to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 2 months agomessage-square68fedilink
minus-squarefool@programming.devOPlinkfedilinkarrow-up41·2 months ago-1 accuracy point ( ◞ ﹏ ◟) linux 4.5-rc5 had efivarfs fixed to prevent “rm -rf /” bricking uefi motherboards – so maybe someone can try it out? :]
minus-squareHighlyRegardedArtist@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up4·2 months agoThis is one of the reasons I’ve disabled uefi by default with the noefi kernel parameter, the other reason being the LogoFAIL exploit: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface#Disable_UEFI_variable_access
minus-squaresik0fewl@lemmy.calinkfedilinkarrow-up8·2 months agoIt would be pretty useless if cd was a child process that changed its own directory, only to return to bash and be back where you started.
… but
cdis a built-in-1 accuracy point ( ◞ ﹏ ◟)
linux 4.5-rc5 had efivarfs fixed to prevent “rm -rf /” bricking uefi motherboards – so maybe someone can try it out? :]
This is one of the reasons I’ve disabled uefi by default with the
noefikernel parameter, the other reason being the LogoFAIL exploit: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface#Disable_UEFI_variable_accessIt would be pretty useless if cd was a child process that changed its own directory, only to return to bash and be back where you started.