cant daul boot PopOS and Windows on desktop (seperate drives): Updated

[KGIII]

If we go back up to where they shared the command they used, that command won't actually work. I'm not sure what it'll spit out for data (hopefully, something like 'file not found' -- but this is Windows we're talking about) but the input they quoted wasn't pointing at the .iso file. It was just some generic name.

Has OP tried the command as listed in my post above? If so, what were the results?

They're replied between now and then. Perhaps they overlooked the post.

 

[Iamgeese]

Have you tried other distributions other than Pop OS and still get the same result?

I had problems with Tails

 

[Iamgeese]

It looks like you are doing that properly. I haven't used Windows in a while. Hmm... Yeah, it has been a long time since I last used Windows.

Well, you might not be doing it quite right.

Get-FileHash C:\Users\geese\Downloads\[B]Insertlinuxnamehere[/B] -Algorithm SHA384 | Format-List

You need to use the actual name of the .iso file. Something like this:

Get-FileHash C:\Users\geese\Downloads\pop-os_22.04_amd64_nvidia_58.iso -Algorithm SHA384

From what I've found online, you don't need the extra stuff at the end. From the command you wrote, that won't actually work -- as it needs to point to the correct file. (If you've already done that, disregard this.)

That said, I downloaded the .iso and checked it on Linux. The checksum was a match.

Tried your suggestion, same issue persists but since you are using Linux maybe its just wonkdows being a miserable git? I did have the original name pointing to the directory. I do get a hash, its just wrong and I wonder if Windows just diddled it on the way down?

Its obviously something going on at my end, I am wondering if it is the browser itself, maybe I should do it via the command line if I can even do that in Windows

 

[Iamgeese]

Looking more into the error message:

Verifying shim SBAT data failed Security Policy Violaiton

It's linked to Windows finding an insecure version of the bootloader due to a security update that Windows performed.
Maybe with Linux command-line remove the SBAT policy.....that is if you can boot into Linux.

Try blocking the SBAT feature in Windows. LAST RESORT! ***

Verifying shim SBAT data failed: Security Policy Violation

It seems that with the recent Windows Update, for systems that have dual-boot is not letting grub start, showing the message: Verifying shim SBAT data failed: Security Policy Violation. Does anyone...

askubuntu.com

• 1. Boot into Windows.
• 2. Open the Command Prompt as an administrator.
• 3. Run the following command and press Enter: reg add HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\SecureBoot\SBAT /v OptOut /d 1 /t REG_DWORD
• 4. Close the Command Prompt and restart your computer.

Helpful video on the issue:

Once I figure why my Iso file is getting diddled on the way down, hopefully this issue will solve itself. I had non of this cobblers with my laptop.

 

[Iamgeese]

Windows REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

 

[KGIII]

Tried your suggestion, same issue persists but since you are using Linux maybe its just wonkdows being a miserable git? I did have the original name pointing to the directory. I do get a hash, its just wrong and I wonder if Windows just diddled it on the way down?

Its obviously something going on at my end, I am wondering if it is the browser itself, maybe I should do it via the command line if I can even do that in Windows

Thanks for the follow up. It's important to do that, so that we know what has been tried and what has not been tried. Help us help you, in other words. It's okay. It can be EXTREMELY difficult to ask support questions and to navigate the answers given. We've all been new to Linux at one point or another. Not one of us came out of the womb knowing how to use Linux.

I have one crazy thought... I doubt it's correct. I have a couple of crazy thoughts, in fact. None of them are all that good, but I'll share them as they may lead to the answer via giving us a new way to think about the problem.

I wonder if the storage format matters.

The .iso files have 'permissions'. Linux file permissions aren't correctly stored in the NTFS file system. I've done a few quick searches and have come across authoritative answers like the following link:

In Windows file systems, is there a pre-computed hash for each file?

I want to search a file duplicate by its hash. For performance purposes I want to know if there is a stored hash/checksum for each file in NTFS/FAT file systems. If there is, I don't have to comput...

stackoverflow.com

And, I found answers like this:

No, storing a file on NTFS does not change its standard checksum (like an MD5 or SHA1 hash) because NTFS does not calculate checksums for file data by default. A file's checksum is a hash of its content, and the NTFS file system does not alter the file's data when storing it, so the hash remains the same.

Which, well, makes more sense. I doubt that it's permissions that are changing anything.

Hmm...

Is Windows doing something to the file after you downloaded it? Could it be your AV has scanned it and attached a bit to the file that says 'this is safe, do not scan in the future'? (That's entirely speculative but meant to be an example of how the file can change.)

Frankly, I'd just use the file at this point. If it doesn't work, pick a different version of Linux and use that. I seldom check these values, and I do not recall ever once having a botched download -- and I've had some REALLY bad internet connections in my life.

Some distros will offer you the chance to download them as a torrent. That will automatically check this for you.

You can also try spinning up a VM, installing some version of Linux on that VM, and then doing a checksum comparison with that virtual machine.

 

[wizardfromoz]

Perphaps @wizardfromoz may have something in his wand to enlighten you.

I can't provide better options than those offered by yourself and others, Alex, haven;t used Windows since 2014.

I can ask a couple of questions.

@Iamgeese

1. What version of Windows, eg 10 or 11?

2. am having to look at why I keep getting different checksums to the ones on the website.

   Which method are you using to check the checksum? eg MD5sum or Shasum in Terminal? A GUI solution, if so, which?

Cheers

Wizard

 

[Iamgeese]

Thanks for the follow up. It's important to do that, so that we know what has been tried and what has not been tried. Help us help you, in other words. It's okay. It can be EXTREMELY difficult to ask support questions and to navigate the answers given. We've all been new to Linux at one point or another. Not one of us came out of the womb knowing how to use Linux.

I have one crazy thought... I doubt it's correct. I have a couple of crazy thoughts, in fact. None of them are all that good, but I'll share them as they may lead to the answer via giving us a new way to think about the problem.

I wonder if the storage format matters.

The .iso files have 'permissions'. Linux file permissions aren't correctly stored in the NTFS file system. I've done a few quick searches and have come across authoritative answers like the following link:

In Windows file systems, is there a pre-computed hash for each file?

I want to search a file duplicate by its hash. For performance purposes I want to know if there is a stored hash/checksum for each file in NTFS/FAT file systems. If there is, I don't have to comput...

stackoverflow.com

And, I found answers like this:



Which, well, makes more sense. I doubt that it's permissions that are changing anything.

Hmm...

Is Windows doing something to the file after you downloaded it? Could it be your AV has scanned it and attached a bit to the file that says 'this is safe, do not scan in the future'? (That's entirely speculative but meant to be an example of how the file can change.)

Frankly, I'd just use the file at this point. If it doesn't work, pick a different version of Linux and use that. I seldom check these values, and I do not recall ever once having a botched download -- and I've had some REALLY bad internet connections in my life.

Some distros will offer you the chance to download them as a torrent. That will automatically check this for you.

You can also try spinning up a VM, installing some version of Linux on that VM, and then doing a checksum comparison with that virtual machine.

I can't provide better options than those offered by yourself and others, Alex, haven;t used Windows since 2014.

I can ask a couple of questions.

@Iamgeese

1. What version of Windows, eg 10 or 11?
2. 
   Which method are you using to check the checksum? eg MD5sum or Shasum in Terminal? A GUI solution, if so, which?

Cheers

Wizard

I am afraid its the dreaded windows 11 due to the nature of some of the software I use ( now all being killed off with subscription software). There are some Linux alts but its going to be slow and a bit painful but at this point I want anything just to get away from big techs disgusting ego and moral bankruptcy.

I spoke to my dad and says it could be windows adding something to it

I am going into the windows powershell and doing the MD5 checksum.

 

[Alexzee]

I had problems with Tails

What problems exactly did you experience with Tails?
Aside from Tails, have you tried any other Live Linux distros via (DVD or USB) like Debian or Linux Mint?
I highly recommend Linux Mint Live if your new to Linux.

Download Linux Mint 22.3 - Linux Mint

Linux Mint is an elegant, easy to use, up to date and comfortable desktop operating system.

linuxmint.com

Ok so your using the md5checksum in Windows. Thanks for the confirmation-
Does the practice of using the shasum or the GUI in Windows make any difference?

FWIW, I tried to install a Red Hat based and Debian based distro on a friends HP Pavillion desktop that was approximately 10 years old. The Live usb would boot but it would not install.

A complete tear down reveled a boat load of proprietary hardware/rivets that I didn't have the hand tools to remove. Additionally, there were proprietary arms (plastic and metal structures) holding the desktop and mobo together that prevented further tear down.

 

[Iamgeese]

What problems exactly did you experience with Tails?
Aside from Tails, have you tried any other Live Linux distros via (DVD or USB) like Debian or Linux Mint?
I highly recommend Linux Mint Live if your new to Linux.

Download Linux Mint 22.3 - Linux Mint

Linux Mint is an elegant, easy to use, up to date and comfortable desktop operating system.

linuxmint.com

Ok so your using the md5checksum in Windows. Thanks for the confirmation-
Does the practice of using the shasum or the GUI in Windows make any difference?

FWIW, I tried to install a Red Hat based and Debian based distro on a friends HP Pavillion desktop that was approximately 10 years old. The Live usb would boot but it would not install.

A complete tear down reveled a boat load of proprietary hardware/rivets that I didn't have the hand tools to remove. Additionally, there were proprietary arms (plastic and metal structures) holding the desktop and mobo together that prevented further tear down.

I downloaded Linux mint but it was a while ago, like last year. No issues. So maybe windows is diddling everything this year? Because god forbid more people leave when they start uploading your personall stuff to the cloud (jokes on them, mine are on a seperate drive). I specfifically want PopOs because it seems to work well with everything I plan on doing

 

[KGIII]

I spoke to my dad and says it could be windows adding something to it

As mentioned above, under the circumstances, that seems like a reasonable avenue of discovery. Without the ability to recreate your system and lacking the forensic tools, I can not rule out the possibility.

Above, I mentioned your security software. I know very little about current anti-malware software, but it's "reasonable" for your AV software to add a bit to a file, and use that bit as an indicator that the file has been checked and has not been changed since the file was first checked.

I use the word 'reasonable' in quotes. As a Linux user, I find it unthinkable that an application would modify anything on my system without my express permission. I suppose it'd speed things up because the security software knows that it doesn't have to scan it again. If it were something I designed, I'd use some hashing to check it and then just store the hash, which can be checked quickly, and then ignore all the files that had a matching hash.

Heck, if I were an industrious AV software vendor, I might even be so bold as to (automated, of course) check some of the more popular files on the web. I'd then incorporate those hashes into the resident AV, which would then know if the software came from the source. That'd also allow me to give the user a warning when the hashes don't match.

 

[Iamgeese]

As mentioned above, under the circumstances, that seems like a reasonable avenue of discovery. Without the ability to recreate your system and lacking the forensic tools, I can not rule out the possibility.

Above, I mentioned your security software. I know very little about current anti-malware software, but it's "reasonable" for your AV software to add a bit to a file, and use that bit as an indicator that the file has been checked and has not been changed since the file was first checked.

I use the word 'reasonable' in quotes. As a Linux user, I find it unthinkable that an application would modify anything on my system without my express permission. I suppose it'd speed things up because the security software knows that it doesn't have to scan it again. If it were something I designed, I'd use some hashing to check it and then just store the hash, which can be checked quickly, and then ignore all the files that had a matching hash.

Heck, if I were an industrious AV software vendor, I might even be so bold as to (automated, of course) check some of the more popular files on the web. I'd then incorporate those hashes into the resident AV, which would then know if the software came from the source. That'd also allow me to give the user a warning when the hashes don't match.

very interesting thoughts. I never thought about what AV might try and do that.

 

[KGIII]

very interesting thoughts. I never thought about what AV might try and do that.

It's just a possibility. I have no way to be certain, but it appears that something on your system is changing files.

Heck, it could be malware that's causing that. I am only speculating and can't say for certain what's going on.

 

[Iamgeese]

It's just a possibility. I have no way to be certain, but it appears that something on your system is changing files.

Heck, it could be malware that's causing that. I am only speculating and can't say for certain what's going on.

Just had a thought. I run Portmaster. Could this do something to the Hash?

 

[Alexzee]

I downloaded Linux mint but it was a while ago, like last year. No issues. So maybe windows is diddling everything this year? Because god forbid more people leave when they start uploading your personall stuff to the cloud (jokes on them, mine are on a seperate drive). I specfifically want PopOs because it seems to work well with everything I plan on doing

Diddling is what it looks like to me friend.

I'm with @KGIII it could be malware and also.........

There was a anti trust lawsuit in the 1990's.

United States v. Microsoft Corp. - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[KGIII]

There was a anti trust lawsuit in the 1990's.

It's very unlikely that MSFT is doing this, as this is just one person with the problem. Other WIndows users have used checksum verification in the past. They've not had any issues. I did at one point wonder if it was an NTFS thing, but I reasoned my way out of that. Again, it's an isolated issue.

That's kind of the issue... Heck, it's the worst kind of issue!

Just had a thought. I run Portmaster. Could this do something to the Hash?

I don't know what that is. A search for 'portmaster' gives multiple results.

Is it this one? https://safing.io/

If so, I'd doubt it. I'm not seeing them mention it anywhere. It (likely) wouldn't be malicious, as they're free open source software (FOSS). I did a few searches and nobody mentions them changing files. That seems like something they'd mention. They appear to be a relatively reputable company.

Also, that looks like an interesting tool. Thanks for sharing, even if unintended.

It's even available for Linux! (I used to lock down my computers with a firewall and not use AV on Windows.)

For you folks who use a firewall, specifically UFW, you might want to take a look at this. I'd never seen it before. It looks basic enough, but also robust enough. I have yet to test it, but it looks like a solid choice.

If yo do give it a try, you could consider posting a review somewhere on the forum.

 

[Iamgeese]

Diddling is what it looks like to me friend.

I'm with @KGIII it could be malware and also.........

There was a anti trust lawsuit in the 1990's.

United States v. Microsoft Corp. - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

yeah, windows cant keep its 1s and 0s to itself

 

[Alexzee]

yeah, windows cant keep its 1s and 0s to itself

LOL!

 

[Iamgeese]

I went looking for a file today and then I found this crap instead and honestly this really really really pissed me off. I dont know why windows puts search all (which really means the internet) right in the task bar first thing, its not even useful. I dont even want this option, its stupid, I went looking for a file named "axlotol" on my system and instead I get served this A.I slop refrence right on my own desktop and Its not even an axlotol its..... its not even a real animal, it is A.I generated. Imagin you are six years old and you are getting served this confusing crap passively.

This is exaclty why I want out of windows, its is not just because if enshitification and increasing lack of choice in how we use our own systems but also this. THIS is the rabid deranged crap that they support, Open A.I. (which they are in bed with) and big A.I spreading falsehoods, mass gaslighting on a scale never seen before in human history and wrecking the next generation by feeding children confusing lies.

All this just so they dont have to pay people because little jhonny wants another big yacht, but how dare you want to be able to pay your bills and god forbid EAT, thats an entitled attitude! They want to throw everything under the bus for THIS. They are a bunch of overfed pigs that are never full, they want my food, your food and everyone elses and each time someone leaves thier little ecosystem they lose just a bit of power each time. Time for the fat pigs to starve.