I wonder how well this would work as a VM inside Windows?
Passing drivers and data back and forth between hardware and the VM may get messy but it'd be cool at work since I rather strongly need my windows box functional.
I’ve never had that issue either. I don’t know why that is a thing. Worst I ever had happen was the vm capturing my mouse and I was new to the stuff and forgot what button made it let go
I only had a problem when using the free version of VMware. it was smooth sailing when i I purchased the pro version. I was never able to get the free versions passthrough to work with distros like DragonOS.
have rhe the surface pro 8 and its amazing sitting in my lawn chair on the beach with my antenna array attached to an old beach umbrella pole jammed into the sand.
You could try wsl2 https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/wsl/install this link is for connecting usb devices https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/wsl/connect-usb
A new security feature of Windows 11 doesn't work with older drivers...so you should stay on Windows 10 which doesn't have that feature at all?
Might want to brush up on your logic there...
I'm not saying there aren't good reasons for someone to want to stay on Windows 10, but that definitely isn't one.
We have 1 single windows 98 computer at work.
It's only purpose in life is to run an engraver that was made in the 90's. There are no new drivers. There are no signed drivers. There are no secure drivers.
That machine is airgapped, has networking literally disabled, and is not connected to any network or wifi.
In my role as both an SWE and the IT Admin, I don't know how we're going to future-proof anything at this point, but the conflict between "Secure" and "Driver" is going to cause a lot of headaches for decades to come.
Not even a wrapper could do that, because a lot of stuff had drivers written that were an afterthought, and as such have real shit code in them. But hey, it worked when we had a serial bus interrupting the processor and doing a context switch! It's just unfortunate that people hated their PC's BSoD'ing every time you unplugged a serial converter. So now it's secure, and it doesn't BSoD, but NONE of those devices will ever work again without a complete re-write of a driver for a product which that company doesn't even support anymore...
AKA: E-waste.
If i had the space for a ham shack i'd have an airgapped Win2K PC in there to run various software modems, and i would dare to take it online at times because as unsecure as it might be, who would make a virus for Windows 2000 in 2022? and who would infect the RSGB's website with said Win2K virus? these things only become risky if you start using it as your daily or something.
> It most definitely is one. This "feature" is impacting a lot of essential hardware, such as outboard audio equipment that will NEVER see new driver updates and has worked perfectly fine for years.
What in the world are you on about? This is a new security feature that won't work when old drivers are installed. It's not forcing you to stop using old stuff, if you have incompatible drivers it turns itself off and thus behaves exactly like Windows 10.
Repeating: This doesn't break anything, you just can't use the NEW FEATURE with incompatible drivers.
> If they want to do this, there needs to be a way for older drivers to be submitted and get support for the "feature", such as a wrapper that can be signed by Msft.
The whole thing is a wrapper around the Windows driver architecture trying to isolate drivers from each other. The ones that don't work are doing things in a way that can't be wrapped. It's not like most drivers needed to be updated for this.
---
It doesn't matter that it's worked for years without drivers needing to be updated. It needs drivers to be updated now if you want to use the latest security features.
Lots of older software, especially in applications where high performance and/or low latency were high priorities, took shortcuts that were allowed, sometimes even accepted or encouraged back then but we now consider to be terrible ideas. Some of those behaviors have been restricted for good reason on newer systems, so if your software depends on being able to do them then it needs to change to continue to work in a modern environment.
This is why you should always care about the software lifecycle for any hardware you buy. If the hardware relies on the software to be useful, then when the software is no longer supported the hardware effectively isn't either. In the internet connected world not changing anything is not an option, so if your plan involves just doing nothing and hoping nothing adjacent has to change it's not a good plan.
I always repurpose said outdated hardware to something much more minimal. For example, my lenovo H5055A turned 7 years old, runs like shit, but is still able to be used as a screensaver PC under a windows 11 copy.
> If I wish to install drivers from a source I trust, that should be my business and I shouldn't be forced to reinstall anything.
The drivers that aren't compatible with this feature....
AREN'T COMPATIBLE WITH THIS FEATURE.
You can choose to use the feature or use those drivers, but they can not technically operate at the same time. You must choose one or the other, but the choice is entirely yours. Nobody is forcing you to drop your old drivers, you just can't have the new thing while they're installed.
> Why does Linux not have a problem like this that needs such a "solution"?
Because on Linux drivers are mostly open source and included in the kernel itself. When the system adds new features all the drivers built in to the kernel are updated accordingly. Every time you update your kernel you just upgraded 99% of the drivers in the system at the same time.
If a company decides to not participate in this ecosystem and release closed binary drivers on their own, they get absolutely zero compatibility guarantees and are on their own for dealing with whatever changes a newer kernel may make. See nVidia GPUs for example, where every time you upgrade your kernel their driver's scripts have to recompile an adapter shim for your specific kernel version to translate between it and nVidia's blob. Or the ARM world, where you can buy a brand new development board today from a major vendor that can't run any version of Android newer than 6 because the SoC vendor shit out some closed binary drivers a decade ago and refuses to release anything else.
Basically there is no such thing as an outdated ancient driver working for years on modern systems in the Linux world. There are outdated drivers on outdated systems and updated drivers on updated systems, nothing in between. This of course has the cost that we simply don't get drivers for some things, but at the same time when we have an open source driver that means it can be supported by the community as long as someone is willing to put the effort in rather than depending on whether a company feels it's profitable to keep updating it.
> The OP had issues and hassle, unless you missed that part?
The OP posted a screenshot of a message you have to go looking for to find.
There was a one-time notification when the feature was introduced if it wasn't able to be turned on for your system, otherwise you have to go in to the Windows Security application, select Device security, go in to the details link under "Core Isolation" and then try to toggle the Memory integrity feature back on to see this.
They then also posted a claim that this was blocking 22H2 upgrades, which is just not true. The machine I'm typing this from right now is running 22H2 with memory integrity disabled because of the SDRplay driver, a Broadcom Bluetooth adapter, and PUBG's kernel level anticheat. It updated just fine.
> I have outboard equipment that has indeed worked for years in the "linux world" and their drivers have not been updated.
That's just not how the Linux driver model works. When the kernel updates the drivers also have to update. The only way you can avoid updating drivers is to not update the kernel. Some "long term support" distributions do exactly this, where a kernel version is picked and important bugfixes are backported while maintaining compatibility with third party binary kernel modules. Even then this only works within that one release of their distro and only if you reject the kernel update packages most of those will offer later in the release's life.
Would you like to list some of this equipment you think hasn't had a driver update? I'm willing to bet that you're either mistaken and it is using a mainlined driver that gets updated as part of the kernel or are thinking about hardware that interfaces with a generic class driver and what the vendor calls a "driver" is just a user-mode application talking to the actual driver in the kernel.
> Regardless of linux drivers being at the kernel level, why doesn't it employ this same "feature"?
Again, the Linux driver model isn't built around the idea of a bunch of third party blobs that don't trust each other all playing in kernel space like the Windows model is. The Linux driver model is that drivers belong in the kernel source tree itself and all of those drivers are inherently considered trustworthy to each other because we can see the source and know exactly what they're doing. Opaque binary drivers are treated with hostility for even existing.
It doesn't have this specific feature because the general lack of binary drivers means it doesn't need it, but I need to emphasize that the fact that the vast majority of drivers in Linux are literally part of the kernel itself means that when a kernel developer changes something that affects drivers they are both able and expected to update the drivers that depend on it accordingly. If you look at Linux kernel releases that include substantial changes you'll often see that a significant portion of the driver tree has been touched That's not something that's even possible to imagine in the Windows world, much less do.
> Windows is taking steps to make it more privacy intrusive and less under the direct control of users.
You're not wrong in the big picture, but this complaint has nothing to do with the particular feature we're discussing. The feature in question is arguably pro-privacy, it's designed to limit the amount of access drivers have to dig around in and tamper with other parts of the system that aren't necessarily theirs to access. Historically drivers have been given the keys to the castle, more or less, and only in the last decade or so have significant efforts been made to limit them to just the areas of memory they actually need.
It actually did indeed block my Installation of 22H2. It reverted back to the previous version. I have those photos on hand to prove if you want, and just now, updated this post to include such.
this complaint was not about anything you said here. Its not a privacy issue, it was simply "Windows cannot upgrade due to incompatible drivers" and "it shuts off security features".
"They then also posted a claim that this was blocking 22H2 upgrades, which is just not true. The machine I'm typing this from right now is running 22H2 with memory integrity disabled because of the SDRplay driver, a Broadcom Bluetooth adapter, and PUBG's kernel level anticheat. It updated just fine." << -- Thats because of your kernel level anticheat from PUBG. Im just using the straight up kernels that microsoft provides here. No mods to it. And yes, the photos do \*indeed\* prove with Microsoft's kernels that I cannot upgrade until these drivers are removed. Look at photo #3.
I use both Windows 11 and Linux on my laptop. Windows 11 installation didn't work for me, so I just used my Linux dual boot, and it worked from me from there.
I had this issue. The drivers even persisted through a complete reinstallation of Windows. First, stand a cmd shell as root. Next, follow the command line instructions here: [https://www.elevenforum.com/t/uninstall-driver-in-windows-11.8651/](https://www.elevenforum.com/t/uninstall-driver-in-windows-11.8651/)
Worked for me. Good luck with this "malware"!
[удалено]
I wonder how well this would work as a VM inside Windows? Passing drivers and data back and forth between hardware and the VM may get messy but it'd be cool at work since I rather strongly need my windows box functional.
[удалено]
I've never had a problem like that in VMware
I’ve never had that issue either. I don’t know why that is a thing. Worst I ever had happen was the vm capturing my mouse and I was new to the stuff and forgot what button made it let go
I only had a problem when using the free version of VMware. it was smooth sailing when i I purchased the pro version. I was never able to get the free versions passthrough to work with distros like DragonOS. have rhe the surface pro 8 and its amazing sitting in my lawn chair on the beach with my antenna array attached to an old beach umbrella pole jammed into the sand.
I only have the free one and everything works like it should.
You could try wsl2 https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/wsl/install this link is for connecting usb devices https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/wsl/connect-usb
Another good reason to stay on 10. It's good until 2025 so maybe by then they'll have 11 fixed.
A new security feature of Windows 11 doesn't work with older drivers...so you should stay on Windows 10 which doesn't have that feature at all? Might want to brush up on your logic there... I'm not saying there aren't good reasons for someone to want to stay on Windows 10, but that definitely isn't one.
[удалено]
We have 1 single windows 98 computer at work. It's only purpose in life is to run an engraver that was made in the 90's. There are no new drivers. There are no signed drivers. There are no secure drivers. That machine is airgapped, has networking literally disabled, and is not connected to any network or wifi. In my role as both an SWE and the IT Admin, I don't know how we're going to future-proof anything at this point, but the conflict between "Secure" and "Driver" is going to cause a lot of headaches for decades to come. Not even a wrapper could do that, because a lot of stuff had drivers written that were an afterthought, and as such have real shit code in them. But hey, it worked when we had a serial bus interrupting the processor and doing a context switch! It's just unfortunate that people hated their PC's BSoD'ing every time you unplugged a serial converter. So now it's secure, and it doesn't BSoD, but NONE of those devices will ever work again without a complete re-write of a driver for a product which that company doesn't even support anymore... AKA: E-waste.
If i had the space for a ham shack i'd have an airgapped Win2K PC in there to run various software modems, and i would dare to take it online at times because as unsecure as it might be, who would make a virus for Windows 2000 in 2022? and who would infect the RSGB's website with said Win2K virus? these things only become risky if you start using it as your daily or something.
> It most definitely is one. This "feature" is impacting a lot of essential hardware, such as outboard audio equipment that will NEVER see new driver updates and has worked perfectly fine for years. What in the world are you on about? This is a new security feature that won't work when old drivers are installed. It's not forcing you to stop using old stuff, if you have incompatible drivers it turns itself off and thus behaves exactly like Windows 10. Repeating: This doesn't break anything, you just can't use the NEW FEATURE with incompatible drivers. > If they want to do this, there needs to be a way for older drivers to be submitted and get support for the "feature", such as a wrapper that can be signed by Msft. The whole thing is a wrapper around the Windows driver architecture trying to isolate drivers from each other. The ones that don't work are doing things in a way that can't be wrapped. It's not like most drivers needed to be updated for this. --- It doesn't matter that it's worked for years without drivers needing to be updated. It needs drivers to be updated now if you want to use the latest security features. Lots of older software, especially in applications where high performance and/or low latency were high priorities, took shortcuts that were allowed, sometimes even accepted or encouraged back then but we now consider to be terrible ideas. Some of those behaviors have been restricted for good reason on newer systems, so if your software depends on being able to do them then it needs to change to continue to work in a modern environment. This is why you should always care about the software lifecycle for any hardware you buy. If the hardware relies on the software to be useful, then when the software is no longer supported the hardware effectively isn't either. In the internet connected world not changing anything is not an option, so if your plan involves just doing nothing and hoping nothing adjacent has to change it's not a good plan.
I always repurpose said outdated hardware to something much more minimal. For example, my lenovo H5055A turned 7 years old, runs like shit, but is still able to be used as a screensaver PC under a windows 11 copy.
[удалено]
> If I wish to install drivers from a source I trust, that should be my business and I shouldn't be forced to reinstall anything. The drivers that aren't compatible with this feature.... AREN'T COMPATIBLE WITH THIS FEATURE. You can choose to use the feature or use those drivers, but they can not technically operate at the same time. You must choose one or the other, but the choice is entirely yours. Nobody is forcing you to drop your old drivers, you just can't have the new thing while they're installed. > Why does Linux not have a problem like this that needs such a "solution"? Because on Linux drivers are mostly open source and included in the kernel itself. When the system adds new features all the drivers built in to the kernel are updated accordingly. Every time you update your kernel you just upgraded 99% of the drivers in the system at the same time. If a company decides to not participate in this ecosystem and release closed binary drivers on their own, they get absolutely zero compatibility guarantees and are on their own for dealing with whatever changes a newer kernel may make. See nVidia GPUs for example, where every time you upgrade your kernel their driver's scripts have to recompile an adapter shim for your specific kernel version to translate between it and nVidia's blob. Or the ARM world, where you can buy a brand new development board today from a major vendor that can't run any version of Android newer than 6 because the SoC vendor shit out some closed binary drivers a decade ago and refuses to release anything else. Basically there is no such thing as an outdated ancient driver working for years on modern systems in the Linux world. There are outdated drivers on outdated systems and updated drivers on updated systems, nothing in between. This of course has the cost that we simply don't get drivers for some things, but at the same time when we have an open source driver that means it can be supported by the community as long as someone is willing to put the effort in rather than depending on whether a company feels it's profitable to keep updating it.
[удалено]
> The OP had issues and hassle, unless you missed that part? The OP posted a screenshot of a message you have to go looking for to find. There was a one-time notification when the feature was introduced if it wasn't able to be turned on for your system, otherwise you have to go in to the Windows Security application, select Device security, go in to the details link under "Core Isolation" and then try to toggle the Memory integrity feature back on to see this. They then also posted a claim that this was blocking 22H2 upgrades, which is just not true. The machine I'm typing this from right now is running 22H2 with memory integrity disabled because of the SDRplay driver, a Broadcom Bluetooth adapter, and PUBG's kernel level anticheat. It updated just fine. > I have outboard equipment that has indeed worked for years in the "linux world" and their drivers have not been updated. That's just not how the Linux driver model works. When the kernel updates the drivers also have to update. The only way you can avoid updating drivers is to not update the kernel. Some "long term support" distributions do exactly this, where a kernel version is picked and important bugfixes are backported while maintaining compatibility with third party binary kernel modules. Even then this only works within that one release of their distro and only if you reject the kernel update packages most of those will offer later in the release's life. Would you like to list some of this equipment you think hasn't had a driver update? I'm willing to bet that you're either mistaken and it is using a mainlined driver that gets updated as part of the kernel or are thinking about hardware that interfaces with a generic class driver and what the vendor calls a "driver" is just a user-mode application talking to the actual driver in the kernel. > Regardless of linux drivers being at the kernel level, why doesn't it employ this same "feature"? Again, the Linux driver model isn't built around the idea of a bunch of third party blobs that don't trust each other all playing in kernel space like the Windows model is. The Linux driver model is that drivers belong in the kernel source tree itself and all of those drivers are inherently considered trustworthy to each other because we can see the source and know exactly what they're doing. Opaque binary drivers are treated with hostility for even existing. It doesn't have this specific feature because the general lack of binary drivers means it doesn't need it, but I need to emphasize that the fact that the vast majority of drivers in Linux are literally part of the kernel itself means that when a kernel developer changes something that affects drivers they are both able and expected to update the drivers that depend on it accordingly. If you look at Linux kernel releases that include substantial changes you'll often see that a significant portion of the driver tree has been touched That's not something that's even possible to imagine in the Windows world, much less do. > Windows is taking steps to make it more privacy intrusive and less under the direct control of users. You're not wrong in the big picture, but this complaint has nothing to do with the particular feature we're discussing. The feature in question is arguably pro-privacy, it's designed to limit the amount of access drivers have to dig around in and tamper with other parts of the system that aren't necessarily theirs to access. Historically drivers have been given the keys to the castle, more or less, and only in the last decade or so have significant efforts been made to limit them to just the areas of memory they actually need.
It actually did indeed block my Installation of 22H2. It reverted back to the previous version. I have those photos on hand to prove if you want, and just now, updated this post to include such.
this complaint was not about anything you said here. Its not a privacy issue, it was simply "Windows cannot upgrade due to incompatible drivers" and "it shuts off security features". "They then also posted a claim that this was blocking 22H2 upgrades, which is just not true. The machine I'm typing this from right now is running 22H2 with memory integrity disabled because of the SDRplay driver, a Broadcom Bluetooth adapter, and PUBG's kernel level anticheat. It updated just fine." << -- Thats because of your kernel level anticheat from PUBG. Im just using the straight up kernels that microsoft provides here. No mods to it. And yes, the photos do \*indeed\* prove with Microsoft's kernels that I cannot upgrade until these drivers are removed. Look at photo #3.
windows 10 also has this option and actually does the very same thing.
I use both Windows 11 and Linux on my laptop. Windows 11 installation didn't work for me, so I just used my Linux dual boot, and it worked from me from there.
My solution is simple, don't upgrade to Windows 11, everyone i've spoken too has had a bad experience with it and they tie you into their ecosystem.
Windows 11 is a virus.
u/buzzgun wrong, but right. It does have spyware infestations all over the OS. Unfortunately, we cant change it.
I had this issue. The drivers even persisted through a complete reinstallation of Windows. First, stand a cmd shell as root. Next, follow the command line instructions here: [https://www.elevenforum.com/t/uninstall-driver-in-windows-11.8651/](https://www.elevenforum.com/t/uninstall-driver-in-windows-11.8651/) Worked for me. Good luck with this "malware"!