Jump to content

Value of Open Core's SecureBootModel for hackintoshes


deeveedee
 Share

34 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

I haven't investigated this issue much, so accept my apologies for what might be a remedial question.  Has anyone figured out why installation of Sonoma 14.4+ requires OC's SecureBootModel=Disabled on hacks that don't need SecureBootModel=Disabled to install previous versions of macOS? 

 

Currently, my hack (SMBIOS MacMini8,1 / OC 0.9.9) requires SecureBootModel=Disabled to install Sonoma 14.4+, but after installation, Sonoma 14.4+ runs with SecureBootModel=Default and SecureBootModel=j174.

Edited by deeveedee
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

@miliuco Good to know.  Setting SecureBootModel=Disabled was a lucky guess for me (based on OCLP testing), but now I'm seeing that others knew about this well before me since I didn't test 14.4 Beta.  I see SecureBootModel=Disabled in other posted hack installation/upgrade guides for 14.4. 

 

If I'm correct, iMac19,1 does not have T2 chip (or at least some variations of iMac19,1 do not have T2) - correct?  If so, that's probably why you don't need SecureBootModel=Disabled, but I still don't know why I would need to disable SecureBootModel for installation of 14.4 but not for normal operation of 14.4 on my hack with SMBIOS MacMIni8,1 (which does have T2).

Edited by deeveedee
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@deeveedee

I'm using MacPro7,1 SMBIOS on my Alder Lake rig and I'm still on Monterey and for installing Monterey updates and/or installing macOS Monterey, Ventura and Sonoma I have to set SecureBootModel=Disabled to be successful otherwise I'll get the reboot loop.

So I guess this issue isn't only limited to Sonoma.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

@Cyberdevs MacPro7,1 does have T2, correct?  Interesting that you started observing this with Monterey.  Are you using RestrictEvents.kext with revpatch=sbvmm?

 

@miliuco Are you using RestrictEvents.kext with revpatch=sbvmm?

Edited by deeveedee
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@deeveedee

Afaik, iMac19,1 Macs did not have T2. This is why I don't need RestrictEvents to be notified of updates. 

What I've noticed recently is that, if I disable Gatekeeper, I don't get update notifications. In previous Sonoma updates this was not necessary.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, deeveedee said:

@Cyberdevs MacPro7,1 does have T2, correct?  Interesting that you started observing this with Monterey.  Are you using RestrictEvents.kext with revpatch=sbvmm?

 

@miliuco Are you using RestrictEvents.kext with revpatch=sbvmm?

Yes as far as I know it has a T2 Chip and yes I do use RestrictEvents.kext but for Monterey I don't use revpatch=sbvmm boot arg, maybe I should use the boot arg and see if that changes the behavior when I try to install Monterey or other installations.

I don't use the revpatch=sbvmm because I do get the incremental updates so I didn't think that it was needed in my case.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Cyberdevs said:

I don't use the revpatch=sbvmm because I do get the incremental updates so I didn't think that it was needed in my case.

 

You're probably right.  I don't remember all the reasons for using revpatch and will need to refresh my memory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Revpatch informs macOS that you are using VMWare to get updates from Apple. But if you are using SMBIOS iMac19,1 (or MacBookPro15,1?) then you'll get update without this patch.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...