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

FCC updates covered list to include foreign-made consumer routers

fcc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 452 posts

Re: FCC updates covered list to include foreign-made consumer routers

#411

Post by inejge »

pixl97 wrote: post #293
inejge wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So, we don't need an electrical code to enforce correct wiring. For an analogy to work, its underlying elements should have a relation to the target. Your analogy is not in the same universe. For electrical work, there is a baseline of materials and practices which is known to produce acceptable results if adhered to. For software, there isn't. (Don't tell me about the Space Shuttle. Consumer software doesn't cost…

I mean this is still a semi-bs response on your case, even if you don't realize it. Many of these devices have security flaws that are horrific and out of best practices by over a decade. Just having something like "Have a bonded 3rd party security team review the source code and running router software" would solve around 95% of the stupid things they do.

> Just having something like "Have a bonded 3rd party security team review the source code and running router software" would solve around 95% of the stupid things they do.

It would certainly help, but no economically feasible amount of auditing and best practices could lead to having a warranty on that software. My thesis is that our current understanding of software is fundamentally weaker than that of practical applications of electricity, so it makes no sense to present analogies between the two.

Re: FCC updates covered list to include foreign-made consumer routers

#412

Post by vjvjvjvjghv »

9cb14c1ec0 wrote: post #385
Miraste wrote: post #341

This is the same thing they did to drones. It's corruption. It doesn't even make sense from an extreme isolationist point of view, because there's no path to create domestic manufacturing. I'm guessing the rest of this looks like drones, too: FCC approval is given only to American companies that bribe members of the administration, and they raise prices through the roof. The routers are still manufactured overseas an…

There absolutely is a path to domestic manufacturing. It might be long and hard, but it does exist. Source: My company manages logistics for dozens of US manufacturing companies.

“Long and hard” is not something the US does anymore. You would be insane to invest here based on the assumption that the current tariffs and regulations will survive any period of time. Even Trump changes his mind every week, probably based on whoever pays most.

Re: FCC updates covered list to include foreign-made consumer routers

#413

Post by glitchc »

riskable wrote: post #256
thayne wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What you need is the ability for consumers to replace the firmware. I don't think that's enough. Most people aren't going to replace the firmware on their device with an open source replacement made by someone else. Now if the firmware was required to be open source, and automatic updates could be seamlessly switched over to a non-profit or government agency in the event of the company going out of business, you mi…

I have a PC hooked up to my TV in my living room that has been running the latest version of Kubuntu for over 18 years now. It has had many upgrades in that time but it's still the same basic hardware: A CPU, some memory, USB ports, a video card, and an ethernet port on the back. That "genericness" is what's missing in the router space. Literally every consumer router that comes out has some super proprietary design…

It's not so simple. Routers, like most tech emitting and modulating an RF signal by design, are certified products. The radio frequency bands, output power, allowed channels are all tightly controlled. Allowing end-users control without restrictions over such equipment would be unsafe.

Re: FCC updates covered list to include foreign-made consumer routers

#414

Post by glitchc »

tombert wrote: post #334

Seems like now is as good a time as any for people who know how to do this to build their own routers with Pfsense, Opnsense, ClearOS, or one of the many other firewall/router distros out there. You can get an old desktop or laptop that's more than good enough to be a router for basically nothing (or sometimes literally nothing) on Craigslist or Ebay. I suspect pretty much anyone who frequents this forum could probab…

It's not the router part that's hard. Any PC can become a router. You still need a wireless AP with an RF transceiver. That's where the restrictions are and why the FCC regulates them in the first place.

Re: FCC updates covered list to include foreign-made consumer routers

#415

Post by ssl-3 »

dmonitor wrote: post #183
ssl-3 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies want to sell what consumers want to buy. But the average consumer doesn't want a general-purpose computer for this job; they instead want to buy a "router". If companies market the devices as something other than "routers" then consumers will not buy them for routing duty. (Meanwhile, the non-average people who want to use general-purpose computers as homespun router/NAS/do-all boxes are already aware of ho…

The average consumer doesn't want a router full stop. Their ISP hands them an all-in-one modem+router+switch+WAP box and they just accept that the internet lives inside of it. I have roommates who are engineers and I had to explain to them the difference between Wi-fi access point and LAN when I replaces our wireless router with a router + 3 APs.

That's quite true. Most people don't know, and most people don't care. And of those who do care, many elect to rent/buy things like managed wifi mesh systems and/or faster service from their ISP to solve performance or coverage issues when a bit of SQM and another access point might do the trick in a once-and-done fashion.

And I don't mean to suggest, in any way, that this means that most people are stupid or anything like that. They can have ridiculously high intelligence while the nuts and bolts of networking remain completely beyond the scope of their thought processes.

But yet: Every-day consumer-oriented stores (including Wal-Mart) have routers (and mesh systems and...) in stock on the shelf for purchase in Anytown, USA right now. So while they may not be the majority, people are buying them.

Re: FCC updates covered list to include foreign-made consumer routers

#416

Post by Miraste »

groundzeros2015 wrote: post #400
Miraste wrote: post #341

This is the same thing they did to drones. It's corruption. It doesn't even make sense from an extreme isolationist point of view, because there's no path to create domestic manufacturing. I'm guessing the rest of this looks like drones, too: FCC approval is given only to American companies that bribe members of the administration, and they raise prices through the roof. The routers are still manufactured overseas an…

Why is there no path? Surely it’s possible to do?

It would take years, maybe decades. We saw the same thing with drones. It's impossible to overstate how much the supply chain for modern electronics depends on China. Everything in a router, from the chips to the resistors to the antennae to the coating on the PCBs, comes from there.If you wanted to build it all in America, even if you had unlimited funding it would take forever.

There's no router industry here because there's (mostly) no electronics industry, and to make one you'd need to build all the supply chains and subsidiary industries from scratch.

Re: FCC updates covered list to include foreign-made consumer routers

#417

Post by kelnos »

rayiner wrote: post #244
kelnos wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where in the Federal Communications Commission's governing legislation does it say that they're only allowed to regulate things sent through the airwaves?

It applies to communications over radio or wire: “The provisions of this act shall apply to all interstate and foreign communication by wire or radio and all interstate and foreign transmission of energy by radio, which originates and/or is received within the United States, and to all persons engaged within the United States in such communication or such transmission of energy by radio, and to the licensing and regu…

That's from the 1934 Communications Act. You're sure nothing has changed legislatively about the FCC in 92 years?

Re: FCC updates covered list to include foreign-made consumer routers

#418

Post by jzkdroid »

estimator7292 wrote: post #364
jzkdroid wrote: post #324

I just bought a new router 6 months ago to support wifi 7. Hopefully manufacturers will be willing to jump through the hoops for long term support. Don't want to Flash OpenWrt.

"I sure hope corporations will keep on capitulating and eroding everyone's freedom because I don't want to think for myself" Very enlightened and useful comment, thank you for your participation.

I sure hope corporations will keep supporting products they sell no matter the hurdles placed in their ways for their devices useful lifespans.

Re: FCC updates covered list to include foreign-made consumer routers

#420

Post by b112 »

foobiekr wrote: post #347
b112 wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're responding to the wrong comment, or missing the nuance above. Having state actors redirecting products after shipping, without telling the company or the client it's happening, and installing backdoors, has nothing at all to do with backdoors from manufacturers.

You seem to have missed this part: >a foreign nation state would pressure a manufacturer in their jurisdiction to include a backdoor That absolutely is about jurisdiction and is a much bigger, more scalable attack than intercepting and installing implants. More to the point, it can be done at _any time_ not just the initial ship.

In as I was specifically not talking about that, and even said so, no.. it's not relevant.
Post reply on HN