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

OpenWrt Two Approval

openwrt.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 133 posts

Re: OpenWrt Two Approval

#31

Post by SargeDebian »

pzo wrote: post #12

What I would want to have some company to make one device that would at the same time be: 1) router 2) smart tv (airplay, chromecast, miracast) 3) smart speaker 4) smart home gateway (matter) 5) wireless charging pad 6) private cloud (nextcloud) 7) private backup (removable nvm) 8) private vpn / dns / pihole / adguard 9) mini server Everything in a nice package and preconfigure and ideally modular (upgradable ssd, wi…

Openwrt ticks a lot of those boxes if you add storage. For me, the location of my router makes using it as a charging pad, speaker, and TV device impractical anyway, and I can imagine I'm not alone in that.

Re: OpenWrt Two Approval

#32

Post by unethical_ban »

donnachangstein wrote: post #21
neilv wrote: post #11

GL.iNet is a popular brand, though I can't find a Wikipedia page for it. https://www.gl-inet.com/about-us/ says: > GL Tech (HK) Ltd: #601, 5W, Hong Kong Science Park, N.T. Hong Kong > GL Intelligence, Inc.: 10400 Eaton Place, Suite 215, Fairfax, VA 22030 I'm a little curious about this. One of the reasons that some people run OpenWrt is for improved security. In the general security space, a Shenzen company isn't the…

Is it really any different than every person who insists on running pfSense for security reasons then immediately suggesting some Chinese shitbox PC off AliExpress as the ideal platform to run it on? Also, since when has having a Wikipedia page proven a company legitimate? You know most companies author their own pages anyway, that's kind of how Wikipedia works.

As opposed to the people who run insecure software on questionable hardware? Is everyone supposed to buy Checkpoint?

Re: OpenWrt Two Approval

#33

Post by cycomanic »

walterbell wrote: post #29
miohtama wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you recommend Western companies that would be able to produce similar hardware at the same price point?

In the absence of PC Engines (RIP) Swiss design made in Taiwan, there is the South Korean ODROID from https://hardkernel.com . Compulab in Israel has some customizable IoT boards, https://www.compulab.com/products/sbcs/sbc-iot-imx8-nxp-i-mx... QNAP in Taiwan has QHora routers, but much higher price points.

The irony here is that it's the US who has been proven to break into allied networks and infrastructure and done both political and industrial espionage against their allies.

Re: OpenWrt Two Approval

#34

Post by walterbell »

cycomanic wrote: post #33
walterbell wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the absence of PC Engines (RIP) Swiss design made in Taiwan, there is the South Korean ODROID from https://hardkernel.com . Compulab in Israel has some customizable IoT boards, https://www.compulab.com/products/sbcs/sbc-iot-imx8-nxp-i-mx... QNAP in Taiwan has QHora routers, but much higher price points.

The irony here is that it's the US who has been proven to break into allied networks and infrastructure and done both political and industrial espionage against their allies.

If global manufacturers would get with the program and ship blob-free hardware with mainline Linux support, owners could pick their desired firmware and software poison. Until then, we have Cambrian hardware innovation, old kernels and mystery firmware from Shenzen, which can be compromised by a broad spectrum of hostile actors.

Re: OpenWrt Two Approval

#35

Post by 3np »

neilv wrote: post #11

GL.iNet is a popular brand, though I can't find a Wikipedia page for it. https://www.gl-inet.com/about-us/ says: > GL Tech (HK) Ltd: #601, 5W, Hong Kong Science Park, N.T. Hong Kong > GL Intelligence, Inc.: 10400 Eaton Place, Suite 215, Fairfax, VA 22030 I'm a little curious about this. One of the reasons that some people run OpenWrt is for improved security. In the general security space, a Shenzen company isn't the…

I'm less concerned with their jurisdiction and company profile than their absent software/firmware maintenance.

I have a bunch of their different models and in practice most of them are unusable today (based on ancient upstream with missing important updates; their sources are a huge mess with scarce and out-of-date docs so have fun resolving that yourself; device dtb/driver require unavailable patches; IIRC their stock vendor firmware phones out and they seem to be pushing towards a centrally managed cloud platform I wouldnt trust)

It really is a shame as on paper and out-of-box-right-after launch their devices seem great but after spending too many days failing to get working builds for in particular the Mudi/E750 while realizing that stock firmware is unsafe in untrusted networks, I've given up on them until I see some drastic change in maintenance culture.

The collaboration with OpenWrt might make the "Two" an exception, I guess, if the OpenWrt people are involved and demanding enough.

Re: OpenWrt Two Approval

#37

Post by wtallis »

donnachangstein wrote: post #21
neilv wrote: post #11

GL.iNet is a popular brand, though I can't find a Wikipedia page for it. https://www.gl-inet.com/about-us/ says: > GL Tech (HK) Ltd: #601, 5W, Hong Kong Science Park, N.T. Hong Kong > GL Intelligence, Inc.: 10400 Eaton Place, Suite 215, Fairfax, VA 22030 I'm a little curious about this. One of the reasons that some people run OpenWrt is for improved security. In the general security space, a Shenzen company isn't the…

Is it really any different than every person who insists on running pfSense for security reasons then immediately suggesting some Chinese shitbox PC off AliExpress as the ideal platform to run it on? Also, since when has having a Wikipedia page proven a company legitimate? You know most companies author their own pages anyway, that's kind of how Wikipedia works.

> suggesting some Chinese shitbox PC off AliExpress as the ideal platform to run it on?

How reasonable do you think it is to be this automatically suspicious of any computer coming from China? A generic low-cost barebones Intel PC certainly has plenty of space for compromised firmware to hide, but it's implausible that a Chinese intelligence agency would indiscriminately deploy an attack that made use of a compromised Intel Management Engine firmware signing key to put firmware rootkits in cheap hardware sold to individual consumers.

On an embedded system like the OpenWRT Two where the entire BOM of the system will be public and the OS has full control over the raw flash memory, a purely software-based supply chain attack would be extremely difficult, and a hardware-based supply chain attack would be expensive. Do you think an intelligence agency would really bother with this for a device that is mostly going to be shipping to nerdy hobbyists?

There's more to a threat model than just recognizing that an attack may be technically feasible.

Re: OpenWrt Two Approval

#38

Post by squarefoot »

miohtama wrote: post #27
neilv wrote: post #11

GL.iNet is a popular brand, though I can't find a Wikipedia page for it. https://www.gl-inet.com/about-us/ says: > GL Tech (HK) Ltd: #601, 5W, Hong Kong Science Park, N.T. Hong Kong > GL Intelligence, Inc.: 10400 Eaton Place, Suite 215, Fairfax, VA 22030 I'm a little curious about this. One of the reasons that some people run OpenWrt is for improved security. In the general security space, a Shenzen company isn't the…

Can you recommend Western companies that would be able to produce similar hardware at the same price point?

Mikrotik sells also bare boards. They come with their RouterOS platform (Linux based, closed) but some can run OpenWRT. Also Olimex has really interesting and open products, but they're not primarily aimed at networking.

https://mikrotik.com/products/group/routerboard

https://www.olimex.com/

Re: OpenWrt Two Approval

#39

Post by squarefoot »

RestartKernel wrote: post #19
petesergeant wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OpenWRT "One" and "Two" are physical routers designed specifically to run OpenWRT. This is describing "Open WRT Two", a physical piece of hardware, that will have a price-tag, rather than some new software release of OpenWRT.

This should be at the top, since it's not clear at all from the RFC.

Possibly the result of little or no announcements elsewhere. I learned about the OpenWRT One existence only after searching what OpenWRT Two is 10 minutes ago.

Re: OpenWrt Two Approval

#40

Post by sgjohnson »

miohtama wrote: post #27
neilv wrote: post #11

GL.iNet is a popular brand, though I can't find a Wikipedia page for it. https://www.gl-inet.com/about-us/ says: > GL Tech (HK) Ltd: #601, 5W, Hong Kong Science Park, N.T. Hong Kong > GL Intelligence, Inc.: 10400 Eaton Place, Suite 215, Fairfax, VA 22030 I'm a little curious about this. One of the reasons that some people run OpenWrt is for improved security. In the general security space, a Shenzen company isn't the…

Can you recommend Western companies that would be able to produce similar hardware at the same price point?

https://store.ui.com/us/en/category/all-cloud-gateways/produ...

4x 2.5GbE (one of them even a PoE port)

1x 10GbE SFP+

WiFi 7 with MLO

$279

Post reply on HN