Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Reverse Engineering Bambu Connect

wiki.rossmanngroup.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 367 posts

Re: Reverse Engineering Bambu Connect

#331

Post by kennywinker »

autoexec wrote: post #283
kennywinker wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alternate description of the same information: “newer upgrades made older devices batteries’ last longer” They did nerf speed. But they did it for a reason. I get being mad about your phone being slowed down, but i don’t get being mad about it once you understand why.

> They did nerf speed. But they did it for a reason. That reason was to incentivize people to replace their old "slow" phones with faster new phones. If Apple actually cared about the problem of older phones having limited battery life they'd have made the batteries in their phones replaceable.

There are conflicting priorities in every product. Apple tends to optimize look and feel over practicality. So they’ve drawn a hard line at user-serviceable battery. I agree with you that’d a bad call, but I also understand that once you’ve made that call the next best option is what they did.

Re: Reverse Engineering Bambu Connect

#332

Post by floating-io »

kube-system wrote: post #265
floating-io wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you so sure? https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2025/A2228?utm_ca... Not quite the same, and hopefully likely to fail if it hasn't already, but it shows that interest exists in regulating 3D printers. When enough interest exists, things will happen. JMHO.

If NY state did require a background check to buy a 3D printer, you'd have to get one regardless of whether you're buying a prusa or a bambu printer.

...and?

Applying to all brands equally doesn't make it okay.

Re: Reverse Engineering Bambu Connect

#333

Post by esskay »

CarVac wrote: post #210
esskay wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thing is even with the core one finally releasing...its not a compelling product. It costs more than the P1S - which lets fact it, thats what it should be compared to, not the X1C as the Core one doesn't have the stronger nozzle, nor any features that would make it a 'pro' level product. They also still dont have an answer to the AMS, which is a big selling point for the Bambu's. The MMU3 may be better than the previ…

> not the X1C as the Core one doesn't have the stronger nozzle Swapping nozzles makes the machine worth double?

Not at all, you're paying for a bunch of other differences on the X1, none of which the core one has, hence why its more comparable to the p1s but priced as if its comparable to the x1c. The spec sheets don't lie, it's a p1s competitor.

Re: Reverse Engineering Bambu Connect

#334

Post by whatsthatabout »

dlgeek wrote: post #328

What I don't get...BambuSlicer is open source. And, not only is it open source, it's a fork of PrussaSlicer, so Bambu doesn't have the ability to re-license it. It's licensed under the Affero GPL which is very strict about the licensing of derived works. That license requires Bambu to include the source code to any additions they make, including all of the logic, keys, etc. that they're baking into any binary distrib…

BambuConnect is not part of BambuStudio - That's intentional, so BambuLab does not need to share/open-source it.

The current implementation (the Bambu network plugin thingy) isn't a part of it either, it's downloaded by the client when BambuStudio is opened.

Re: Reverse Engineering Bambu Connect

#335

Post by bborud »

esskay wrote: post #194
bborud wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I ThouYS may have a point. It seems to me that Prusa were tempted to go after the prosumer/pro market and invested a lot of time and engineering horsepower into higher spec machines (Prusa XL, HT90) and resin printers (SL1S). A lot of 3D printer companies have tried to go this route. It is not a strategy that tends to succeed. I don't know their sales numbers, but I would be willing to bet that the ROI on those print…

Thing is even with the core one finally releasing...its not a compelling product. It costs more than the P1S - which lets fact it, thats what it should be compared to, not the X1C as the Core one doesn't have the stronger nozzle, nor any features that would make it a 'pro' level product. They also still dont have an answer to the AMS, which is a big selling point for the Bambu's. The MMU3 may be better than the previ…

It would be interesting to know how many people buy printers with AMS or other multi-material capability. How big of a selling point is it really?

Re: Reverse Engineering Bambu Connect

#336

Post by emiliobumachar »

op00to wrote: post #284
emiliobumachar wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My toilet doesn't officially support crapping without an internet connection either. I'd argue that in both cases it's implicit unless very explicitly disclaimed.

How would a toilet with no electronics require an internet connection?

It wouldn't, but, if the vendor somehow made it require one, despite the very impressive technical feat, I'd feel cheated. Robbed, even.

Re: Reverse Engineering Bambu Connect

#337

Post by kube-system »

floating-io wrote: post #332
kube-system wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If NY state did require a background check to buy a 3D printer, you'd have to get one regardless of whether you're buying a prusa or a bambu printer.

...and? Applying to all brands equally doesn't make it okay.

I am saying it doesn’t matter whether it is open source or not.

Re: Reverse Engineering Bambu Connect

#338

Post by K0balt »

Xelbair wrote: post #312
K0balt wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you left It hooked up to a charger, their fix would never have affected you. It only slowed down the cpu when the risk of catastrophic shutdown was imminent. I like a toggle for features like this, but it was a pretty standard user experience / reliability choice imho.

what if i want to do that AFTER fix was applied? what if you replace battery AFTER the fix was applied? you can't rollback. again, it's about user's choice. it's not apple's device, but whoever bought it. they shouldn't be even allowed to DECIDE which option is better. user should be able to pick whichever they want to go with.

With a new battery, the throttling goes away. The cpu throttling only kicks in if your battery condition is poor, and then only at lower charge levels where the risk of unplanned power loss is imminent.

I get it, but if you’re going to accept binary blob updates from a manufacturer at all, this one wasn’t bad.

If there was a toggle, Would you really run your phone in “reckless disregard for battery condition” mode?

Because that is what this fixed, a flaw in the firmware where the power management subsystem made incorrect assumptions about the battery condition. All new phones come with this baked in and working properly, so your phone doesn’t randomly die in the middle of calls when your battery gets old.

People pitchforked over this update without understanding what it was designed to do. If your phone has a good battery, it does not throttle the cpu. It just adjusts the power management profiles to reflect battery aging.

Re: Reverse Engineering Bambu Connect

#339

Post by immibis »

bayindirh wrote: post #291
immibis wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to have evidence that this is because of attestation, though - lots of open source software is missing lots of features because they are just missing features.

It's not an attestation problem, but a trusted pipeline problem. Yes, the required files are missing, but carrying them from official builds doesn't work either, because all pipeline from modem to kernel has to be signed, and the chain breaks somewhere, and you can't build it without the private keys Google/OEM has. It's like Trusted HDCP pipeline. Every part has to be signed properly, and no open distribution of And…

Okay but I'd like to see evidence of this because most missing features are just missing features.

Re: Reverse Engineering Bambu Connect

#340

Post by bayindirh »

immibis wrote: post #339
bayindirh wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not an attestation problem, but a trusted pipeline problem. Yes, the required files are missing, but carrying them from official builds doesn't work either, because all pipeline from modem to kernel has to be signed, and the chain breaks somewhere, and you can't build it without the private keys Google/OEM has. It's like Trusted HDCP pipeline. Every part has to be signed properly, and no open distribution of And…

Okay but I'd like to see evidence of this because most missing features are just missing features.

SIM services is an integral part of the GSM stack, and all custom ROMs I used had SIM services menu, and I was able to see and utilize the functions in the menu, sans the ones requiring accessing the secure element.

There was one missing file (which I don't remember its name now, it's long gone), but I always carried over that one from the official ROM (same Android version, mind you), but while everything still worked, this was not enabling me to use the secure element based SIM services (namely e-signature).

The problem was not "not being able to access secure element", it was visible, but making it do (secure/verifiable) things, which require an "operator message" to trigger the right process on the phone. Even if the system which I'm trying to login said that the process should start, the phone just didn't respond/started the e-signature process. In my country, if your SIM is blocked for any reason from using these services (e.g. when you change your SIM and not-activate e-sig again), you SHALL and WILL (in RFC sense) get a message detailing what went wrong.

Again, the moment I flashed the original image, secure element based SIM services started working, I didn't need to do anything on the other side. Different ROM, it's working. Flash the custom one, reboot, it's gone. Add the required files back, no luck. That simple.

BTW, I was not mad that it was not working. It's a legally binding wet signature equivalent. I don't want that pipeline to be peek/poke enabled.

Post reply on HN