OpenWRT vs. FCC – Forced Firmware Lockdown? [video] • Hacker News Board

Re: OpenWRT vs. FCC – Forced Firmware Lockdown? [video]

#51

Post by AnimalMuppet » Fri, Aug 28, 2015, 11:18 PM UTC

nickysielicki wrote: post #43

cpncrunch wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First I would advise you to understand why this is being done. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10137739

I don't understand your/his reasoning here. * People don't enable DFS and they mess up radar for Airports. * ~20 reported incidents, people are fined ~$25k and stop. * Therefore we must make it illegal to change the firmware on wireless devices. Only 20 cases? $25k fines!? Why can't we continue to solve this problem like this? The hobbyists flashing their devices with OpenWRT and then making a conscious decision to o…

Because one case can (potentially) cause the radar to miss a wind-shear threat, which is precisely what the radar is there to detect. Missing that can cause a plane crash and kill anywhere from one to a few hundred people.

Given that level of potential downside (even if things would have to happen exactly wrong for it to occur), I'm not sure that "we fine them $25K and they stop" is the right trade-off. I'm not sure that "only 20 reported incidents" is a level that you should expect people to be comfortable with. I'm not sure "we'll continue to not be horribly unlucky" is a valid approach.

Re: OpenWRT vs. FCC – Forced Firmware Lockdown? [video]

#52

Post by madez » Fri, Aug 28, 2015, 11:32 PM UTC

cpncrunch wrote: post #32

wyager wrote: post #10

A government-mandated locked-down radio firmware isn't much better than a government-mandated locked-down main firmware. The FCC should punish crimes, not impose prior restrictions on innocent people.

The reason they're doing this is because a lot of crimes have been committed -- resulting in interference with weather radar. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10137739

The reasonable answer to that is to regulate wifi frequencies world wide and modify weather radars if necessary. That would solve the interference problem while keeping the firmware open.

Freedom is better.

Re: OpenWRT vs. FCC – Forced Firmware Lockdown? [video]

#53

Post by wmf » Fri, Aug 28, 2015, 11:42 PM UTC

mindslight wrote: post #44

wmf wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAIK most lower-end routers have pretty generic firmware (with their logo added) as well. Maybe paying a no-name firmware sweatshop to tweak some reference firmware is cheaper than tweaking OpenWhatever.

Do they even have enough memory for OpenWRT? Maybe DD-WRT. At the low end, I'd think the chipset manufacturer would do most of the software work, then the device manufacturer just cosmetically tweaks the reference.

Ah, memories of the bad old days when the VxWorks license fee was less than the cost of the extra RAM necessary to run Linux.

Re: OpenWRT vs. FCC – Forced Firmware Lockdown? [video]

#54

Post by cpncrunch » Fri, Aug 28, 2015, 11:43 PM UTC

madez wrote: post #52

cpncrunch wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason they're doing this is because a lot of crimes have been committed -- resulting in interference with weather radar. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10137739

The reasonable answer to that is to regulate wifi frequencies world wide and modify weather radars if necessary. That would solve the interference problem while keeping the firmware open. Freedom is better.

As I understand it, this was all known when 5Ghz wifi was introduced, so it was a trade-off (see the 2013 NTIA report for details). I don't think it makes sense for them to move all existing services in the 5Ghz band to a completely new band (which might not work anyway, due to the technical requirements of doppler windshear radar). It probably also wouldn't make sense to limit wifi to a small range of the 5Ghz band. However I'm not really an expert on this, so feel free to correct me.

Oh, and you can get freedom -- it's just the radio software that's the issue. The obvious solution is to make the radio software un-flashable, and leave the router software flashable.

Re: OpenWRT vs. FCC – Forced Firmware Lockdown? [video]

#55

Post by CamperBob2 » Fri, Aug 28, 2015, 11:50 PM UTC

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #51

nickysielicki wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand your/his reasoning here. * People don't enable DFS and they mess up radar for Airports. * ~20 reported incidents, people are fined ~$25k and stop. * Therefore we must make it illegal to change the firmware on wireless devices. Only 20 cases? $25k fines!? Why can't we continue to solve this problem like this? The hobbyists flashing their devices with OpenWRT and then making a conscious decision to o…

Because one case can (potentially) cause the radar to miss a wind-shear threat, which is precisely what the radar is there to detect. Missing that can cause a plane crash and kill anywhere from one to a few hundred people. Given that level of potential downside (even if things would have to happen exactly wrong for it to occur), I'm not sure that "we fine them $25K and they stop" is the right trade-off. I'm not sure…

This is just a variation on the old "Turn off your Game Boys before takeoff, or the plane might crash" schtick.

The proper way to fix that issue, if there ever was one, was to mandate the implementation of avionics that can't be jammed by a Part 15 device. Instead, look what happened... we got a decade of silly, groundless rules that had no useful effect and were eventually scrapped.

Now it looks like it's the WiFi industry's turn. Gee, maybe putting weather radar right next to an unlicensed ISM band wasn't such a great idea. Maybe they're the ones who should move.

Re: OpenWRT vs. FCC – Forced Firmware Lockdown? [video]

#56

Post by quotemstr » Fri, Aug 28, 2015, 11:54 PM UTC

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #51

nickysielicki wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand your/his reasoning here. * People don't enable DFS and they mess up radar for Airports. * ~20 reported incidents, people are fined ~$25k and stop. * Therefore we must make it illegal to change the firmware on wireless devices. Only 20 cases? $25k fines!? Why can't we continue to solve this problem like this? The hobbyists flashing their devices with OpenWRT and then making a conscious decision to o…

Because one case can (potentially) cause the radar to miss a wind-shear threat, which is precisely what the radar is there to detect. Missing that can cause a plane crash and kill anywhere from one to a few hundred people. Given that level of potential downside (even if things would have to happen exactly wrong for it to occur), I'm not sure that "we fine them $25K and they stop" is the right trade-off. I'm not sure…

You would stop all WiFi experimentation just to decrease slightly the odds of inference with a radar that _might_ help prevent a crash? We don't live in a society focused entirely on safety. Safety is important, but it's not trump card that automatically beats all other concerns. When a proposed policy reduces risks only slightly but has large costs, we shouldn't enact that policy.

Now, who decides what "slightly" and "large" mean in this context? You didn't provide any numbers. Given that 87,000 [1] flights take off and land safely in the US each day and that there have been 20 reported TDWR inference incidents ever, we cannot justify the harm this policy would do to the technology community.

[1] http://sos.noaa.gov/Datasets/dataset.php?id=44

Re: OpenWRT vs. FCC – Forced Firmware Lockdown? [video]

#57

Post by noir_lord » Fri, Aug 28, 2015, 11:58 PM UTC

mark-r wrote: post #23

tzs wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or the router manufacturers will properly modularize their designs so that the parts you need to replace to fix a compromise are separate from the parts that ensure that the radio stays on legal frequencies, under legal power limits, and uses legal modulation modes.

The cheapest way to ensure those things is to do it in software, which is how we get into this situation in the first place. Modularization will cost more, and what manufacturer is going to willingly sign up for that?

The one made too by FCC regulations.

Companies would do lots of things if they could get away with it, as someone commented on here a while back (and I wish I could find it) "It's a corporation of course you can expect it to shit on the kitchen floor"

Re: OpenWRT vs. FCC – Forced Firmware Lockdown? [video]

#58

Post by cpncrunch » Fri, Aug 28, 2015, 11:58 PM UTC

CamperBob2 wrote: post #55

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because one case can (potentially) cause the radar to miss a wind-shear threat, which is precisely what the radar is there to detect. Missing that can cause a plane crash and kill anywhere from one to a few hundred people. Given that level of potential downside (even if things would have to happen exactly wrong for it to occur), I'm not sure that "we fine them $25K and they stop" is the right trade-off. I'm not sure…

This is just a variation on the old "Turn off your Game Boys before takeoff, or the plane might crash" schtick. The proper way to fix that issue, if there ever was one, was to mandate the implementation of avionics that can't be jammed by a Part 15 device. Instead, look what happened... we got a decade of silly, groundless rules that had no useful effect and were eventually scrapped. Now it looks like it's the WiFi i…

It's not quite the same as the gameboy. There have never been any instances of electronics interfering with avionics, but there have been quite a few instances of wifi interfering with weather radar. Also the weather radar was there first, and the issues were known right from the start.

Re: OpenWRT vs. FCC – Forced Firmware Lockdown? [video]

#59

Post by noir_lord » Fri, Aug 28, 2015, 11:59 PM UTC

function_seven wrote: post #41

tzs wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are not using a Google or Apple router, I don't see why they would care if you are running third party firmware on your router. If you are using a Google or Apple router and they do not want you to replace the firmware on it they could use signed firmware already. They would not need to have the FCC tell them that they have to use signed firmware in order to use signed firmware. If there was some way to use th…

I think parent meant competition. If all other choices are super-exploitable crapware-laden routers, then Google's and Apple's devices become that much more valuable. Not sure effects on the market would be that great, but I can see how it would benefit GOOG/AAPL to reduce choices.

Oth hand no way in hell would I consider putting a Google device in the most important spot on my network, My distrust of them grows by the day.

Re: OpenWRT vs. FCC – Forced Firmware Lockdown? [video]

#60

Post by Karunamon » Sat, Aug 29, 2015, 12:14 AM UTC

cpncrunch wrote: post #58

CamperBob2 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just a variation on the old "Turn off your Game Boys before takeoff, or the plane might crash" schtick. The proper way to fix that issue, if there ever was one, was to mandate the implementation of avionics that can't be jammed by a Part 15 device. Instead, look what happened... we got a decade of silly, groundless rules that had no useful effect and were eventually scrapped. Now it looks like it's the WiFi i…

It's not quite the same as the gameboy. There have never been any instances of electronics interfering with avionics, but there have been quite a few instances of wifi interfering with weather radar. Also the weather radar was there first, and the issues were known right from the start.

If by "quite a few", you mean "20" - which is insignificant compared to the ~80K flights happening in this country every year.