[Linuxtrent] Re: Nuove regole dell'FCC minacciano l'installazione di sw libero su molti device con wifi
- From: Roberto Resoli <roberto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: linuxtrent@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 10:18:21 +0200
Il 01/09/2015 10:10, Roberto Resoli ha scritto:
Il 31/08/2015 23:14, Diaolin ha scritto:
http://www.cnx-software.com/2015/08/07/openwrt-vs-fcc-forced-firmware-lockdown-presentation-video-and-slides/
rob
Siamo alla frutta.
Io vorrei ananas, grazie
Considerazioni sul dessert (sulle quali sono d'accordo) a parte, nella
pagina di cui sopra leggo: "Goal of the new rules: preventing users from
using illegal channels on the 2.4 GHz band, using too high transmission
power, using DFS channels in 5.3 – 5.7GHz band without having DFS
functionality, and avoiding interfering with (airport) terminal-area
doppler weather radars.
"
Mi sembra che le misure previste per assicurare quanto sopra siano un
tantino drastiche, e nella pagina della FCC dedicata vedo che molti (tra
questi organismi come ANSI, Telecommunications Industry Association e
Consumer Electronics Association) hanno chiesto una dilazione dei
termini per inviare commenti.
La richiesta credo sia stata accolta, visto che la pagina risulta ancora
aperta, nonostante il termine scadesse il 16 Agosto.
Tra i commenti c'è questo di Leo Famulari, che mi sembra meritevole di
essere citato integralmente:
"
Regarding section 46 of 15-170 and the proposal to expand the scope of
the SDR-related requirements:
I personally have used a variety of open-source 3rd-party firmwares
(OpenWrt,
Tomato, and DD-WRT) on my home wireless routers over the years because they
provide more capabilities and greater security than the firmware that
came pre-installed.
While I appreciate the FCC's role as a steward of the public's spectrum,
preventing consumers from using these open-source firmwares would extend
the security disaster we are currently living through with these
devices. The firmware that comes installed on home wireless routers is
almost always out-of-date and insecure, and there is never an upgrade
channel to fix these issues. The open-source firmwares have thrived
because they have dedicated teams of volunteer experts who patch
security holes and bugs. This process happens in the open where anybody
can inspect their work, unlike the manufacturers' firmware. The best
manufacturers' firmware, judged on security and stability, are _based
on_ 3rd party open-source firmware.
Another consideration is that not allowing open-source firmwares means
that end users can't be certain of what's running on their devices.
Given that the NSA has previously intercepted and modified new routers
en route to users
(
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/05/photos-of-an-nsa-upgrade-factory-show-cisco-router-getting-implant/),
users need to be able to install their own firmware to avoid being
(illegally) surveilled by any number of bad actors. Just as the NSA
have modified devices for their purposes, we should expect that Chinese
authorities have modified devices built on their soil before shipping
them to us here in USA. Do you really want to mandate that American
consumers cannot protect themselves from the spy agencies of the world?
And where do we draw the line between foreign spies and criminals?
Not being able to install 3rd party firmware on most/all newer devices
will make setting up my home network far more frustrating the next time
I upgrade my hardware.
And on a broader scale, it'll stifle competition—upstart
manufacturers will have trouble selling their solutions because
businesses won't want to migrate to new software. If OpenWrt eventually
becomes defunct because no new devices support it, then the situation
will be even worse, because new manufactures won't have a reference
point to base their firmwares off of. So these new regulations are
actually very anti-competitive given the place open-source firmwares
like OpenWrt play in the market.
The internet and computing revolution has succeeded to the degree it has
_because_ of open-source. Linux exists, so every operating system vendor
does not need to reimplement a kernel from scratch. They are freed to
focus on solving new problems, and if they have a novel solution to
something kernel-related, they can share it with the world through
Linux. Likewise, the 3rd-party wireless router firmwares serve a similar
purpose. Innovation in this area will grind to a halt if vendors have to
reimplement the firmware from scratch and
not share improvements with each other. The open-source firmwares
provide a common workspace so that we can stop reinventing the wheel and
continue solving new problems.
Allowing end-users to install open-source firmwares is really important.
Please don't broaden the restrictions on custom firmwares, and please
consider reversing existing restrictions.
Regards,
Leo Famulari"
--
Per iscriversi (o disiscriversi), basta spedire un messaggio con OGGETTO
"subscribe" (o "unsubscribe") a
mailto:linuxtrent-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Other related posts: