| 02:31.49 | *** join/#qi-hardware promach_ (~promach@2001:e68:4427:fbd0:b8e8:efdc:b576:db20) |
| 04:06.52 | *** join/#qi-hardware diarything (~starcard@79-73-122-8.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 04:29.18 | *** join/#qi-hardware diarything (~starcard@79-73-122-37.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 04:58.06 | *** join/#qi-hardware diarything (~starcard@79-73-122-69.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 05:02.41 | *** join/#qi-hardware opbolt (~starcard@79-73-122-80.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 05:24.17 | *** join/#qi-hardware opbolt (~starcard@79-73-122-107.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 05:50.35 | kyak | having a free toolchain and reverse engineered free toolchain is very different |
| 05:51.49 | kyak | phrases like "... it seems we can create correct functional Verilog models ..." is not very assuring |
| 05:52.06 | kyak | on the front page of the project |
| 06:05.40 | *** join/#qi-hardware dcht00 (~quassel@2a01:4a0:3::5096:aeb) |
| 06:05.44 | *** join/#qi-hardware fdcx (357@ceata/consiliu/FDCX) |
| 06:06.42 | *** join/#qi-hardware usr (~usr@unaffiliated/usr) |
| 06:21.57 | *** part/#qi-hardware Oksana (~Wikiwide@Maemo/community/ex-council/Wikiwide) |
| 07:50.40 | *** join/#qi-hardware wej (j@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-jwiihuoybnpllicq) |
| 07:57.47 | *** join/#qi-hardware opbolt (~starcard@79-73-123-35.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 09:16.44 | *** join/#qi-hardware zcrc (~pcercuei@89-67-68-240.dynamic.chello.pl) |
| 10:12.10 | *** join/#qi-hardware diarything (~starcard@79-73-124-89.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 10:47.59 | *** join/#qi-hardware diarything (~starcard@79-73-124-160.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 10:51.39 | *** join/#qi-hardware SopaXorzTaker (~SopaXorzT@unaffiliated/sopaxorztaker) |
| 11:43.38 | *** join/#qi-hardware diarything (~starcard@79-73-124-255.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 12:30.09 | *** join/#qi-hardware eintopf (~eintopf@unaffiliated/eintopf) |
| 12:50.23 | *** join/#qi-hardware diarything (~starcard@79-73-125-128.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 13:07.06 | *** join/#qi-hardware opbolt (~starcard@79-73-125-174.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 13:16.58 | DocScrutinizer05 | haha, yeah |
| 13:48.20 | *** join/#qi-hardware zcrc (~pcercuei@213.143.48.229) |
| 13:58.20 | *** join/#qi-hardware dandon_ (~dandon@88.151.72.14) |
| 15:12.00 | *** join/#qi-hardware opbolt (~starcard@79-73-126-183.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 15:51.25 | DocScrutinizer05 | https://boingboing.net/2017/09/18/antifeatures-for-all.html :-/ |
| 16:57.25 | *** join/#qi-hardware opbolt (~starcard@79-73-127-142.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 18:45.02 | *** join/#qi-hardware tavish (~tavish@unaffiliated/tavish) |
| 18:50.10 | *** join/#qi-hardware qwebirc90825 (5337d245@gateway/web/freenode/ip.83.55.210.69) |
| 18:50.38 | qwebirc90825 | what do you think is the highest priority project that could be done |
| 18:50.43 | qwebirc90825 | in terms of qi hardware |
| 18:50.58 | qwebirc90825 | smartphone or laptop |
| 18:55.46 | qwebirc90825 | anyone? |
| 19:43.47 | DocScrutinizer05 | smartphone? |
| 19:44.15 | DocScrutinizer05 | the question is rather fuzzy |
| 19:45.15 | qwebirc90825 | I mean in terms of impact |
| 19:45.43 | qwebirc90825 | the fsf puts developing a free smartphone OS as a high priority |
| 19:51.03 | DocScrutinizer05 | as if there were none yet |
| 19:51.33 | DocScrutinizer05 | it's just FSF has no clue about embedded and hw, particularly when it comes to phones |
| 19:52.14 | qwebirc90825 | I guess there are not completely happy about Replicant |
| 19:52.40 | DocScrutinizer05 | of course not since it's still using a RIL blob aiui |
| 19:53.13 | qwebirc90825 | and there is the issue of GSM and privacy |
| 19:53.22 | DocScrutinizer05 | no |
| 19:53.51 | DocScrutinizer05 | there is no such issue, this is extremely oversimplified |
| 19:54.10 | DocScrutinizer05 | there is e.g. ASN1 vulnerability |
| 19:54.44 | DocScrutinizer05 | and OTA update, and generally the problem of an inevitably intangible radio stack firmware |
| 19:55.14 | DocScrutinizer05 | https://neo900.org/news/about-the-asn1-vulnerability |
| 19:55.44 | DocScrutinizer05 | GSM per se is orthogonal to any provacy concerns |
| 19:55.58 | DocScrutinizer05 | privacy |
| 19:56.52 | DocScrutinizer05 | >>issue of GSM and privacy<< is FSF's obscured approach to the topic |
| 19:57.28 | DocScrutinizer05 | since they have no idea about the actual hw design and the sw implications there from |
| 19:57.45 | qwebirc90825 | ok, I'll try to educate myself on the topic |
| 19:57.52 | DocScrutinizer05 | at least it was like this a two years ago |
| 19:58.19 | qwebirc90825 | I was thinking about location privacy |
| 19:58.30 | DocScrutinizer05 | http://neo900.org/stuff/cccamp15/ccc2015talk/neo900-wpwrak_CCC2015.webm |
| 19:59.04 | DocScrutinizer05 | there is no such thing like locations privacy as soon as you use any arbitrary RF transmitter |
| 19:59.20 | DocScrutinizer05 | ~U-TDOA |
| 19:59.20 | infobot | from memory, u-tdoa is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-TDOA |
| 19:59.57 | DocScrutinizer05 | all technical subjects that FSF is largely ignorant of |
| 20:00.48 | DocScrutinizer05 | >>Because U-TDOA is a network-based location technology, it does not require the mobile phone to have any special chip, hardware, or software in it.<< |
| 20:01.20 | DocScrutinizer05 | s/mobile phone/RF transmitter/ |
| 20:01.21 | qi-bot | DocScrutinizer05 meant: ">>Because U-TDOA is a network-based location technology, it does not require the RF transmitter to have any special chip, hardware, or software in it.<<" |
| 20:01.55 | DocScrutinizer05 | http://en.blitzortung.org/live_lightning_maps.php |
| 20:02.53 | DocScrutinizer05 | waits for FSF suggesting that lightning bolts need a location privacy aware OS, those poor critters ;-P |
| 20:03.28 | DocScrutinizer05 | elementary physics: a transmitter can get located |
| 20:03.42 | DocScrutinizer05 | it is *gets* located in cellphone network |
| 20:04.26 | DocScrutinizer05 | there's zilch you can do about that, neither on hw level nor by a nifty OS |
| 20:04.33 | qwebirc90825 | it seems the Neo900 gets good GSM isolation with respect to main CPU |
| 20:04.41 | DocScrutinizer05 | yes |
| 20:04.48 | DocScrutinizer05 | that's the main design goal |
| 20:04.48 | qwebirc90825 | and all software stack is free |
| 20:04.52 | DocScrutinizer05 | yes |
| 20:04.52 | qwebirc90825 | that's good |
| 20:04.58 | DocScrutinizer05 | on linux land |
| 20:06.27 | qwebirc90825 | I am interested in decentralized networking and mesh stuff |
| 20:06.39 | DocScrutinizer05 | we can't get FOSS firmware for the cpu in WLAN/BT module nor for the cell modem |
| 20:06.44 | qwebirc90825 | seems that the freedom box failed, right? |
| 20:07.03 | DocScrutinizer05 | don't know feedom box |
| 20:07.26 | qwebirc90825 | but those are the only 2 proprietary sectors, right? |
| 20:07.33 | DocScrutinizer05 | wasn't that some totally weird thing like a router to protect your PC from threats, or sth? |
| 20:07.34 | qwebirc90825 | bluetooth is freed? |
| 20:07.48 | qwebirc90825 | sth like a private server |
| 20:07.55 | qwebirc90825 | among other uses |
| 20:07.56 | DocScrutinizer05 | aah yes |
| 20:08.49 | DocScrutinizer05 | yes, those are the two proprietary "sectors" in Neo900. And for WLAN the jury is still out if some smart hacker may RE the firmware |
| 20:08.54 | qwebirc90825 | it seems very difficult to host your own mail server |
| 20:09.05 | DocScrutinizer05 | for cell modem this isn't an option |
| 20:09.39 | DocScrutinizer05 | the cell modem needs approval, on the hw+sw combo |
| 20:10.02 | qwebirc90825 | approval from whom? |
| 20:10.37 | DocScrutinizer05 | so even *if* somebody could RE and modify the radio stack, you would operate an illegal transmitter by using that firmware |
| 20:10.47 | DocScrutinizer05 | approval by FCC et al |
| 20:11.34 | DocScrutinizer05 | operating illegal transmitters is a crime that may result in 10 years of jail in some countries |
| 20:11.39 | DocScrutinizer05 | incl USA |
| 20:11.51 | qwebirc90825 | hardware is hard |
| 20:12.49 | DocScrutinizer05 | don't get me wrong: operating a WLAN out of spec is also illegal but considered a minor crime nevertheless, probably because of the lower damage it may do |
| 20:14.23 | *** join/#qi-hardware diarything (~starcard@79-73-120-185.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 20:14.23 | qwebirc90825 | interesting |
| 20:14.41 | DocScrutinizer05 | with a bad or rogue modem firmware however, you can do anything from changing IMEI which is a nogo for FCC cert, to possibly trying fraud or eavesdropping on the provider network, or tearing the whole cell down |
| 20:15.09 | DocScrutinizer05 | up to your guess what are the chances FCC approves a FOSS radio stack |
| 20:15.46 | DocScrutinizer05 | unless it's cryptosigned so no user could change the actual firmware in modem chipset, despite it being FOSS |
| 20:17.11 | qwebirc90825 | interesting |
| 20:17.30 | DocScrutinizer05 | add to that the mere fact that e.g. for Thorium/NovaThor LTE chipset by ST-Ericsson there were like 400 sw devels busy for over 2 years to create the firmware, and then you get an idea about probability to ever see a FOSS radio stack for cell modem |
| 20:17.50 | DocScrutinizer05 | (I know that particular data since I been one of them) |
| 20:17.55 | qwebirc90825 | then the firmware cannot possibly be GPLv3 |
| 20:18.03 | DocScrutinizer05 | no |
| 20:18.05 | DocScrutinizer05 | can't |
| 20:18.08 | qwebirc90825 | because of the tivoization clause I guess |
| 20:18.23 | DocScrutinizer05 | or it can, but you can't get approval for it then |
| 20:18.29 | DocScrutinizer05 | yes |
| 20:19.22 | qwebirc90825 | maybe we should simply avoid it |
| 20:19.41 | DocScrutinizer05 | you could, in theory, create your own open hw chipset and develop a FOSS radio stack for it, but unless you tivoize it, it won't get approval *anywhere* on this globe |
| 20:20.25 | qwebirc90825 | when you say radio stack you mean all radio signals? |
| 20:21.03 | DocScrutinizer05 | so Neo900 is the only possible approach to dealing with this rogue piece of hardware and embedded software |
| 20:21.36 | DocScrutinizer05 | eadio stack is the control software for the radio aka transmitter and receiver |
| 20:22.10 | DocScrutinizer05 | actually the modem firmware has more than just the radio stack, but that's nitpicking |
| 20:23.00 | DocScrutinizer05 | strictly speaking the filesystem where calibration and IMEI and whatnot gets stored in modem is not part of the radio stack, rather baseband |
| 20:24.10 | DocScrutinizer05 | and obviously IO drivers for serial, USB etc pp are not radio stack either |
| 20:26.09 | qwebirc90825 | why Neo900 the only one? |
| 20:26.43 | DocScrutinizer05 | mostly because it's expensive to separate modem and "linux" Application Processor |
| 20:27.24 | DocScrutinizer05 | virtually all contemporary phones have embedded modem into SoC, for size and cost reasons |
| 20:27.43 | DocScrutinizer05 | see Werner's talk http://neo900.org/stuff/cccamp15/ccc2015talk/neo900-wpwrak_CCC2015.webm |
| 20:28.11 | qwebirc90825 | this modem thing is hard! |
| 20:31.15 | DocScrutinizer05 | and yet I hope we nailed it in Neo900 |
| 20:31.39 | DocScrutinizer05 | now if only FSF would understand that's as good as it possibly gets |
| 20:33.34 | DocScrutinizer05 | but they gave us FSF "approval" for OM GTA01/02 back when only based on the fact that there was no flasher tool for the modem firmware available to end user. Once we made such tool available it basically voided FSF approval |
| 20:34.46 | DocScrutinizer05 | until the sources for the calypso firmware leaked, at which point such tool was mandatory to qualify for FSF approval since without you couldn't flash the leaked firmware |
| 20:35.33 | DocScrutinizer05 | or wait, this leakage still wouldn't suffice, somebody needs to rewrite it under GPL |
| 20:36.12 | DocScrutinizer05 | that's the problem with a *software* centric entity certifying hardware |
| 21:11.33 | *** join/#qi-hardware diarything (~starcard@79-73-120-185.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) |
| 21:16.20 | whitequark | DocScrutinizer05: I actually think the firmware *can* be under GPLv3, technically |
| 21:16.49 | whitequark | if all the firmware authors assign copyright to you, then you can legally take it and flash it into the tivoized BP |
| 21:17.05 | whitequark | and distribute it under GPLv3, so anyone *else* would be stuck without FCC approval |
| 21:18.38 | DocScrutinizer05 | hmm, I thought GPLv3 was also about "must not tivoize" |
| 21:18.51 | whitequark | yes |
| 21:19.03 | whitequark | but if copyright is assigned to you then you are not bound by terms of GPLv3 |
| 21:19.13 | DocScrutinizer05 | hmm, ok |