Is there anything to be gained in having Linux run in UEFI mode?

[m654321]

I am curious to have your opinions (with reasons) on whether you think there is anything to be gained (or not) by having Linux run in UEFI mode in modern PCs, either alone or within a Windows dual-boot, assuming the PC has the facility to select between either BIOS (CMS) or UEFI mode. 

I myself am unsure and feel a bit inexperienced to have any firm opinion on this.  I had always assumed that having a signed Windows OS made it at least a bit more secure, particularly against potential malware attacks to the registery (though I suspect that Microsoft may possibly have exaggerated their claims for UEFI's protective effect as part of their marketing).

Quidsup, a network security analyst by profession, who posts regularly on his YouTube channel at https://www.youtube.com/user/quidsup,  estimates that antivirus/malware software is only 20% effective at most.  Apparently, malware in applications such as flashplayer is immune to antivirus software.  Incidentally, he describes Adobe Flashplayer as "having more security holes than a collander" for which his solution is simply to remove it  from your PC whether you have Windows or Linux...

Linux seems fairly robust against malware, though of course it's not entirely immune - I have had one incident of  malware infection (see https://www.freecinema2022.gq/forums/other...0/#msg4960).  In a dual-boot set-up, could some Windows malware crossover and infect Linux, e.g. through file-sharing - I have heard this might be the case and some malware can infect both platforms? Could UEFI have some beneficial effect here for Linux, in protecting the registry, as with Windows OS?

Many thanks for your views...
Mike