↓Skip to main content

Replicating Bitlocker on Fedora 40

·22 mins

Background #

With Windows 10 reaching end of life in October 2025, Windows 11 being a half-baked regression in many ways, and the recent introduction of (more!) advertisements into Windows 11’s Start menu, I thought it would be worth looking into how viable switching to Linux would be. As part of this, I went through what I use in Windows to check that there’s an equivalent in Linux.

My PC uses Bitlocker full disk encryption with Secure Boot and TPM + PIN unlock, and replicating that on Linux turned out to be more difficult than expected. This post is a walkthrough of what’s involved, explaining what needs to be done and providing complete step-by-step instructions. It’s what I wished I’d found when I started looking into the subject. I’ve pieced the information here together from various man pages, blogs and wikis, and linked to them throughout this post.

The Pieces #

Trusted Platform Modules (TPMs) #

A TPM is a piece of hardware that can be used to store sensitive data in a way that is (supposedly) secure against unauthorised use or retrieval. It can be a dedicated device that you plug into your PC’s motherboard, but modern AMD and Intel CPUs provide a TPM implementation as part of their CPUs, and that’s what my PC uses.

A TPM can be used to store secrets like encryption keys, but also has a set of Platform Configuration Registers (PCRs), which can be used to store hashes of input data. These PCRs can be used to store data related to the boot process in a tamper-proof way.

Secure Boot #

Some types of malware can infect the components of the boot process and so run before the operating system loads. As such, they can bypass the OS’s anti-malware detection and protections.

Secure Boot was introduced by Microsoft as partial protection against such malware, by requiring firmware and the bootloader to be digitally signed by a trusted certificate. The boot process verifies the signatures, and so can detect if the firmware or bootloader have been tampered with. Microsoft has ensured that (x86-based) Windows-certified motherboards (i.e. practically all motherboards) trust Microsoft’s certificate by default, so that the Windows bootloader is trusted by default.

Linux distributions tend to rely on a shim EFI executable to simplify using Linux with Secure Boot. The shim is signed by Microsoft, and is what UEFI boots. When the shim boots, it boots the actual Linux bootloader EFI executable that’s in use, and so you get Secure Boot without having to configure new certificates or having to get Microsoft to sign every Linux bootloader.

The shim requires that the EFI executable it launches is signed by a certificate that is trusted by UEFI or by the shim itself: the shim has an embedded database of distro-specific certificates. Those embedded certificates allow Linux distributions to supply bootloaders, Linux kernels, etc. that they sign instead of Microsoft.

A lot more information about the use of Secure Boot and the shim in Linux can be found on rodsbooks.com.

Secure Boot only covers the boot process up to launching the bootloader, and only cares about the signatures of EFI executables: other data files are out of scope. In Windows, something called Trusted Boot takes over once Secure Boot has allowed the bootloader to launch, by verifying the signatures of the Windows kernel and other components of the Windows boot process. There’s also something called Measured Boot that records measurements of the whole boot process. Microsoft provide a good overview of how these features are used together to secure the Windows boot process.

Full disk encryption (FDE) #

In Windows, full disk encryption is provided by Bitlocker. I’ve got it configured with TPM + PIN authentication and with a recovery key. The TPM + PIN authentication means that Bitlocker stores an encryption key in the TPM and configures the TPM to require a valid PIN to use the stored key. Despite the name, the PIN can contain non-numeric characters, though Windows limits the length to up to 20 characters.

When Bitlocker decryption happens during boot, Bitlocker checks the TPM PCRs to ensure that Secure Boot was successful (PCR 7 holds the Secure Boot measurement). If it was successful, Bitlocker will then ask for the PIN and pass that down to the TPM, and then use the key stored in the TPM to perform the decryption.

In Linux, the equivalent to Bitlocker is LUKS. systemd-cryptenroll can be used to allow LUKS decryption using TPM + PIN and expected PCR values, and can also be used to create a recovery key.

For both Bitlocker and LUKS the encryption key stored in the TPM is not the key used to encrypt your drive’s data, as that would be slow and inflexible. Instead, it’s used to encrypt the data encryption key, and that encrypted key is stored in an unencrypted area on your drive. That detail is not really relevant to the rest of this post, but it’s worth knowing.

Unified Kernel Images #

Despite its name, full disk encryption doesn’t actually encrypt a whole disk (unless it’s a secondary data drive), as you need some unencrypted code somewhere that will do the decryption when you turn your computer on. At a high level, the bootloader, OS kernel and a minimal set of data and code it needs to do the decryption are stored on an unencrypted partition.

In Windows, Secure Boot and Trusted Boot together ensure that the unencrypted boot components have not been tampered with.

In Linux, the components involved are:

  • the bootloader (e.g. GRUB)
  • the Linux kernel
  • the initrd (a.k.a. initramfs)
  • the kernel command line parameters (which include which initrd to load)

As already described, the Secure Boot shim ensures the integrity of the bootloader and Linux kernel. However, nothing does the same for the initrd and kernel parameters. This means that there’s a security hole in the equivalent to Trusted Boot: malware could modify your initrd or your kernel parameters and go undetected.

There are a few ways that you could resolve this, but the approach that has been most widely adopted is to create an EFI executable that combines the kernel and the initrd with an EFI stub that loads them. This is known as a Unified Kernel Image (UKI).

As a UKI is an EFI executable (thanks to the included EFI stub), if it is signed then Secure Boot, the shim and bootloaders can verify its signature and therefore its integrity. If you’re interested, this blog post goes into more detail on the problem that UKIs are trying to solve and how they work in more detail.

A significant complication is that the initrd is usually built locally so that it’s tailored to your hardware, and kernel parameters are often also hardware-specific. That means the distro cannot supply a signed UKI (unless it’s for a known hardware configuration, like a cloud provider’s VMs), and so the UKI must be built and signed locally. That in turn means you need your own signing key and certificate, and you need to make UEFI trust that certificate. Such keys are known as Machine-Owner Keys (MOKs). They’re also used to sign custom kernels and custom kernel modules, so you may come across the term in that context.

Setting it all up #

That’s all the background, so here’s what needs to be done:

  1. Generate a MOK.
  2. Generate a UKI from an existing kernel and initrd.
  3. Use the MOK to sign the UKI.
  4. Configure UEFI to trust the MOK.
  5. Configure the boot process to boot the UKI.
  6. Bind full disk encryption to Secure Boot and other relevant TPM PCRs.
  7. Set up automatic generation of UKIs on kernel updates.

The steps below were carried out on Fedora 40, starting from a fresh install that set up FDE with a passphrase. I’ve also got a separate section further down covering the differences when running Fedora Atomic 40 (e.g. Silverblue, Kinoite).

The Linux install was done in a Hyper-V VM on Windows 10 Pro: real hardware (like a discrete Nvidia graphics card) may introduce some additional complications. I tried to install Fedora to dual-boot it, but the Fedora installer didn’t like me having Windows partitions on the same disk.

Generating a MOK and signed UKI #

First install the packages we’ll need:

sudo dnf install -y systemd-boot-unsigned systemd-ukify sbsigntools openssl

To generate a MOK, run ukify:

sudo ukify genkey \
    --secureboot-private-key /root/secure-boot.key \
    --secureboot-certificate /root/secure-boot.crt

sudo openssl x509 \
    -outform DER \
    -in /root/secure-boot.crt \
    -out /boot/efi/MOK.cer

The openssl command is needed because the certificate needs to be DER-encoded to be trusted by Secure Boot.

To generate a UKI that’s signed by that MOK, run:

KERNEL_VERSION=$(uname -r)

sudo ukify build \
    --linux /boot/vmlinuz-${KERNEL_VERSION} \
    --initrd /boot/initramfs-${KERNEL_VERSION}.img \
    --cmdline @/etc/kernel/cmdline \
    --os-release @/etc/os-release \
    --secureboot-private-key /root/secure-boot.key \
    --secureboot-certificate /root/secure-boot.crt \
    --output /boot/efi/EFI/Linux/linux-${KERNEL_VERSION}.efi

/boot/vmlinuz-${KERNEL_VERSION} and /boot/initramfs-${KERNEL_VERSION}.img are the existing kernel and initrd that the UKI is being built from.

You can then add a entry for the UKI to your UEFI boot menu using:

efibootmgr \
    --unicode \
    --disk /dev/sda \
    --part 1 \
    --create \
    --label "Linux ${KERNEL_VERSION} UKI" \
    --loader /boot/efi/EFI/Linux/linux-${KERNEL_VERSION}.efi

However, I wasn’t able to get this working in Hyper-V because it doesn’t provide access to UEFI settings, so I had no way to enrol my MOK directly with UEFI.

Using the UEFI shim #

While booting directly from UEFI to the UKI would be the simplest approach, we can take advantage of the UEFI shim: it comes with a utility called MokManager that allows you to enrol MOKs so that they are trusted by the shim.

You can optionally trigger the MOK enrolment on next boot by running:

sudo mokutil -i /boot/efi/MOK.cer

Booting the UKI directly from the shim #

The shim is hardcoded to load GRUB, but you can make it load another EFI executable by simply replacing the GRUB executable. To replace GRUB with our own signed UKI, run:

sudo mv /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/grubx64.efi /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/grubx64.efi.bak
sudo cp /boot/efi/EFI/Linux/linux-$(uname -r).efi /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/grubx64.efi

Reboot now. If you haven’t enrolled the MOK yet, the shim won’t trust the UKI and Secure Boot will fail. The shim will display an error and then launch MokManager, which will offer the option to enrol a certificate: choose the MOK.cer file that was created earlier. Your PC will then reboot, and this time everything should work.

To check, run:

sudo bootctl

The output should show Secure Boot: enabled (user) and Measured UKI: yes. You can also check if Secure Boot is enabled by running mokutil --sb-state.

Booting the UKI through systemd-boot #

Booting from shim to UKI isn’t ideal as it means there’s no way to choose between multiple UKIs (e.g. current and previous versions). To increase flexibility, you can introduce a bootloader, and systemd-boot is the simplest to use.

Install it using:

sudo bootctl install

sudo cp -f /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/shimx64.efi /boot/efi/EFI/BOOT/BOOTX64.EFI
sudo mv /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/grubx64.efi /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/grubx64.efi.bak
sudo cp /boot/efi/EFI/systemd/systemd-bootx64.efi /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/grubx64.efi

sudo sbsign \
    --key /root/secure-boot.key \
    --cert /root/secure-boot.crt \
    --output /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/grubx64.efi \
    /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/grubx64.efi

That sets up systemd-boot and makes UEFI boot directly to it, which we then undo so that the shim gets loaded, and we replace GRUB with systemd-boot so that the shim loads the latter, and we sign the renamed systemd-boot EFI file using the MOK that we already enrolled so that the shim trusts it.

systemd-boot automatically detects UKIs that are present in /boot/efi/EFI/Linux/, so there’s no need to configure it to use the UKI.

On reboot, sudo bootctl’s output should show Secure Boot: enabled (user) and Measured UKI: yes.

Booting the UKI through GRUB #

It’s possible to use GRUB instead of systemd-boot, though it requires a little more config, and this post doesn’t cover automating it.

To configure GRUB, add the following to /etc/grub.d/40_custom:

menuentry "Fedora UKI" {
    search --no-floppy --set=root --fs-uuid 1C11-0B16
    chainloader ($root)/EFI/Linux/linux-6.8.4-300.fc40.x86_64.efi
}

Replace the --fs-uuid value with your boot partition’s UUID, and the EFI filename with the filename of the UKI generated by ukify. You can find your boot partition’s UUID by looking for its entry in the output of ls -l /dev/disk/by-uuid/.

Once added, run:

grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/loader/grub.cfg
sudo systemctl reboot

Once again, sudo bootctl’s output should show Secure Boot: enabled (user) and Measured UKI: yes.

Tampering with MokManager? #

Given that signature verification failure results in the ability to enrol a new key, what’s stopping an attacker from taking advantage of that by enrolling a key of their own that they used to sign a compromised UKI of their own?

It is possible to set a password for MokManager by running mokutil --password from a terminal once you’ve booted and providing a password when prompted. If you do that, on next boot MokManager will prompt for that password and then allow you to set another password that it’ll prompt for whenever you enter MokManager in the future.

However, it’s not clear to me where this password is stored: I assume that it’s in the TPM, as I can’t think where else would be safe at that point in the boot process. If that is the case, that’s probably good enough: a compromised MokManager could bypass the password check, but MokManager is signed so that would need one of the distribution signing keys to be compromised too.

There are other mitigations you can use to protect against this risk, as the MOK certificate is measured by the shim, which stores the measurement in PCR 14. More on that later.

It’s also worth noting that I’m assuming that the keys that Secure Boot trusts by default are trustworthy (it is possible to remove them, but I didn’t investigate that), and that a UEFI password is set so that an attacker couldn’t just enrol their own key and so have Secure Boot trust their compromised boot components signed with that key.

Binding FDE unlock to TPM PCRs #

Now that Secure Boot using a UKI is set up, you can configure FDE decryption to use TPM + PIN and bind it to TPM PCRs so that the TPM only allows access to the encryption key if the correct PIN is provided and the TPM PCRs have their expected values.

The standard PCRs and those used by Linux are documented by the UAPI Group. Those of interest to me are:

  • 7 (Secure Boot)
  • 11 (all components of UKIs)
  • 12 (kernel command line parameters, system credentials and config)
  • 13 (system extensions images for initrd)
  • 14 (MOK certificates and hashes)

In my testing I found that changing the kernel image caused PCRs 4, 9, 10 and 11 to change. PCRs 12 and 13 were 0, probably because there’s nothing to measure for them when using a UKI, its embedded kernel command line and no extension initrd images.

You can set up TPM + PIN decryption with PCR bindings in a single command by running:

sudo systemd-cryptenroll \
    --wipe-slot tpm2 \
    --tpm2-device auto \
    --tpm2-pcrs="7+12+13+14" \
    --tpm2-with-pin true \
    /dev/sda3

/dev/sda3 was the partition that my LUKS volume was in, which I found by running lsblk. Although I’m interested in PCR 11, it is omitted because it relies on some additional setup and because I encountered some issues using it: more on that later.

When systemd-cryptencroll runs, it prompts for the disk’s passphrase and then to create a new PIN. It won’t touch the passphrase: that’ll still be a valid way to decrypt the drive, as an alternative to the PIN.

Note that the PIN should not be the same as the LUKS passphrase, as the PCRs are checked after you enter the PIN, so if your system is compromised you could hand over your PIN to your attacker, and if it’s the same as your passphrase they could use it as the passphrase and successfully decrypt your drive.

You may want to introduce the TPM + PIN and PCR bindings in several steps: you could start by omitting --tpm2-with-pin true and passing --tpm2-pcrs="" (since 7 is the default), so that the TPM is used for decryption without any checks, then add PCR numbers to --tpm2-pcrs one-by-one, and then finally adding --tpm2-with-pin true so that you’re also prompted for a PIN on boot. At each stage you can reboot to test that FDE unlock works as expected.

If the systemd-cryptenroll command fails because the TPM is sealed, try running:

echo 5 | sudo tee /sys/class/tpm/tpm0/ppi/request

and then rebooting and trying again.

systemd-cryptenroll uses the current system state to predict the expected values of the PCRs you give it, so if you make changes that will affect PCR values (e.g. installing a new kernel version) then you may need to reboot and use your passphrase to unlock your drive before re-running systemd-cryptenroll to bind to the new PCR values.

As I mentioned earlier, I think that because I’m binding to TPM 14, the TPM won’t allow access to the encryption key unless the UKI being booted is signed by the same key that was used to boot the OS when systemd-cryptenroll was last run. I think this means that there’s no need to set a password for MokManager: while an attacker could enrol their own key in MokManager, if the computer is booted using a UKI that’s signed by their key the PCR 14 value won’t match the value that the TPM is expecting and it won’t allow access to the encryption key. I haven’t tested this though.

Firmware updates #

It’s worth noting that PCR 7’s value changes when there are firmware/UEFI updates, and so on rebooting the PCR’s value won’t match the expected value and the TPM will not allow access to the encryption key.

This means that whenever there’s a firmware update you’ll need reboot, decrypt using something other than your PIN, then re-bind FDE to the TPM PCRs by re-running systemd-cryptenroll and re-entering your LUKS passphrase and PIN.

It should be possible to update the expected value when installing firmware/UEFI updates by predicting what the new value will be (presumably Windows does that, as it doesn’t have this problem), but unfortunately when fwupd runs there is no integration to do that. systemd-pcrlock may resolve this issue, but is experimental at time of writing, so I didn’t try it. I found some discussion of the issue on this Arch wiki talk page.

Binding against TPM PCR 11 #

PCR 11 holds the measurement of all components of UKIs. Instead of binding against the measurement value itself, systemd-cryptenroll’s default behaviour is to bind against any value for which a given public key can verify a signature. I think the idea is that it’s equivalent to how binding to the MOK certificate means that you can use any UKI that’s signed by that certificate, rather than having to recreate the PCR bindings every time you replace the UKI.

This behaviour relies on signed PCR values being embedded within the UKI, which can be done during UKI creation like so:

sudo ukify genkey \
    --pcr-private-key /root/pcr.key \
    --pcr-public-key /root/pcr.pub

KERNEL_VERSION=$(uname -r)

sudo ukify build \
    --linux /boot/vmlinuz-${KERNEL_VERSION} \
    --initrd /boot/initramfs-${KERNEL_VERSION}.img \
    --cmdline @/etc/kernel/cmdline \
    --os-release @/etc/os-release \
    --secureboot-private-key /root/secure-boot.key \
    --secureboot-certificate /root/secure-boot.crt \
    --output /boot/efi/EFI/Linux/linux-${KERNEL_VERSION}.efi \
    --pcr-private-key /root/pcr.key \
    --pcr-public-key /root/pcr.pub

Note the two new --pcr-private-key and --pcr-public-key parameters passed to ukify.

Once the UKI has been rebuilt, re-run systemd-cryptenroll to update the binding to also check the UKI’s embedded signatures. You don’t need to supply any additional parameters, as they’re used to check PCR 11 by default: pass --tpm2-public-key-pcrs="" to systemd-cryptenroll to disable that behaviour.

Unfortunately I wasn’t able to get PCR 11 validation to succeed. The boot log contained:

Error: Esys invalid ESAPI handle (40000001).
Convert handle from TPM2_RH to ESYS_TR, got: 0x40000001
Failed to unseal secret using TPM2: No such device or address.

and those lines were only present when booting from a UKI that had embedded PCR signatures. I thought the error might be because the Hyper-V TPM doesn’t have sha512 PCR banks, but I updated the ukify call to pass --pcr-banks sha1,sha256,sha384 and nothing changed.

In the end I left out PCR 11 from the PCR bindings. Since PCR 14 holds the measurement of MOK certificates and hashes done by the shim, and since I’m using the shim during boot, I don’t think binding to PCR 11 would really add any additional security over binding to PCR 14.

Auto-generate UKI on kernel / initramfs changes #

At this point we have a signed UKI that can be used with Secure Boot and which is verified as part of unlocking FDE. However, the Linux kernel is updated fairly frequently, and having to manually create a UKI every time would not be ideal.

In Fedora, kernel-install is run whenever a kernel is installed or uninstalled using dnf, and can be run manually as kernel-install add. It runs dracut to generate an initramfs as part of its installation processing, and can be made to generate signed UKIs using ukify. However, by default the UKI created does not include an .initrd section, due to mismatches between its dracut and ukify calls. The UKI also gets written to a path that systemd-boot does not look for UKIs in.

To make kernel-install run ukify, create a configuration file at /etc/kernel/install.conf containing:

layout=uki
uki_generator=ukify
BOOT_ROOT=/boot/efi

The uki_generator entry is needed to stop /usr/lib/kernel/install.d/50-dracut.install generating a a UKI using dracut (for some reason it thinks dracut is the default, even though the kernel-install man page says it’s ukify). The BOOT_ROOT entry is to override the default value of /boot so that UKIs get installed in the correct location for systemd-boot to find them: that may be specific to how my boot and EFI partitions happen to be set up though.

To configure ukify to create a signed UKI, create another configuration file at /etc/kernel/uki.conf containing:

[UKI]
Cmdline=@/etc/kernel/cmdline
OSRelease=@/etc/os-release
SecureBootPrivateKey=/root/secure-boot.key
SecureBootCertificate=/root/secure-boot.crt

With that config, every time a new kernel is installed, a corresponding signed UKI will also be generated and installed. Similarly, when a kernel is removed, its corresponding UKI will also be removed.

I also created a file at /etc/kernel/entry-token containing fedora because otherwise my machine ID (a 32-character hexadecimal ID) was used to name the UKIs.

Generating UKIs using dracut #

In Fedora, dracut is used to generate the initramfs, and can also be made to generate signed UKIs. I initially tried to use it instead of going through kernel-install, but found that the UKIs it generates are missing .cmdline and .uname sections. I thought that based on the content of the dracut.cmdline(7) man page, it might be possible to create the former by creating a symlink at /etc/cmdline that points to /etc/kernel/cmdline, but neither a symlink or a hardlink had any effect on the UKI created.

For what it’s worth, to create UKIs with dracut, create /etc/dracut.conf.d/uki.conf (the filename doesn’t matter) containing:

uefi=yes
uefi_secureboot_key=/root/secure-boot.key
uefi_secureboot_cert=/root/secure-boot.crt

Bonus: Replacing the LUKS passphrase with a recovery key #

As mentioned earlier, my Bitlocker configuration requires TPM + PIN or a recovery key to decrypt my drive. We’ve added TPM + PIN as a LUKS unlock option, but it’s still possible to use the original passphrase to unlock the drive (and you’ll need to use it if your bound PCR values change).

Unlike a passphrase, a recovery key is generated by the computer, so tends to be a much stronger form of password, though it’s also probably much more difficult to remember (I store mine in my password manager, accessible on my phone if I need to use it).

systemd-cryptenroll also supports generating recovery keys. To remove the passphrase and create a recovery key, run:

sudo system-cryptenroll --wipe-slot password --recovery-key /dev/sda3

That displays the generated recovery key as text and as a QR code.

There are a couple of things to note:

  • If you replace the passphrase with a recovery key, when subsequent invocations of systemd-crypenroll prompt you for the passphrase, enter the recovery key instead.
  • The boot GUI for entering the unlock PIN/password/recovery key does not differentiate between those options: it’s just a password field with no text. If one doesn’t work, the screen does not display an error message, you just need to try entering another value.

If you’ve forgotten what a LUKS volume is bound to, you can check by running:

sudo cryptsetup luksDump /dev/sda3

where /dev/sda3 is the partition holding the LUKS volume.

Fedora Atomic #

Things are a little different in Fedora Atomic (e.g. Silverblue, Kinoite).

Unified Kernel Images in Fedora Atomic #

Unfortunately Fedora Atomic does not support systemd-boot, so you need to use GRUB instead.

The process for generating a UKI is very similar to that described earlier, except:

  • the kernel and initramfs both live in subdirectories of /boot/ostree, not in /boot, so their paths need adjusting wherever they appear in ukify calls.
  • the --cmdline @/etc/kernel/cmdline parameter needs to be replaced with --cmdline $(rpm-ostree kargs) to avoid an error relating to being unable to mount to /sysroot on boot, as /etc/kernel/cmdline contains the wrong value.

I didn’t test automatically generating UKIs, but the kernel-install scripts are different:

  • The fix to 50-dracut.conf is unnecessary.
  • All the other changes detailed above are still necessary.
  • You’ll need to omit the Cmdline line from /etc/kernel/uki.conf since /etc/kernel/cmdline contains the wrong value.
  • Unfortunately, if you run kernel-install manually then its 60-ukify.install script will use /etc/kernel/cmdline. It looks like automated runs won’t be affected because /etc/kernel/cmdline isn’t used if KERNEL_INSTALL_CONF_ROOT is defined.

TPM support in Fedora Atomic #

Before you can use systemd-cryptenroll, the tpm2-tss module needs to be added to dracut’s configuration. This can be done by creating a file at /etc/dracut.conf.d/tpm2-tss.conf (the filename doesn’t matter) containing:

add_dracutmodules+=" tpm2-tss "

Fedora Atomic doesn’t generate an initramfs locally by default, so that config won’t have any effect until you run:

sudo rpm-ostree initramfs --enable

I also edited the content of /etc/crypttab to become:

luks-<UUID> UUID=<UUID> - tpm2-device=auto,discard

Where <UUID> is the UUID that’s already present in the file. After I edited that file I regenerated the initramfs using:

sudo rpm-ostree initramfs-etc --force-sync

I’m not entirely sure that the crypttab edit was necessary, but Fedora Atomic doesn’t enable TRIM on encrypted SSDs by default because it can leak information like (I think) the size of deleted files. If you don’t care about that, enabling TRIM is a good idea, and that’s what discard does.

Other resources #

I’ve linked to the resources that I used to understand the different pieces of the Linux boot process and get a Bitlocker-like boot working, but I also came across a few other pages that could be useful:

  • Another walkthrough of setting up Secure Boot + TPM + FDE can be found in this blog post, though it’s relatively old and the process can be made much simpler these days.
  • The signing keys can be generated and enrolled with Secure Boot by following the instructions on this Arch Wiki page.
  • This Arch wiki page describes how a UKI can be built and signed in several ways.
  • This page covers setting up Secure Boot and the equivalent to Trusted Boot and includes information on how to do so without relying on Microsoft’s certificates and optionally without using UKIs.
  • I found this openSUSE blog post after I’d written most of this post, and it goes into more detail about how everything involved works.
↑