Re: Intel also needs convincing on firmware licensing.

• Previous message: Al Viro: "massive cross-builds without too much PITA"
• In reply to: Gene Heskett: "Re: Intel also needs convincing on firmware licensing."
• Next in thread: Dax Kelson: "Re: Intel also needs convincing on firmware licensing."
• Reply: Dax Kelson: "Re: Intel also needs convincing on firmware licensing."
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

To: gene.heskett@verizon.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Date:	Thu, 28 Oct 2004 08:50:50 +0300

On Thursday 28 October 2004 06:46, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Wednesday 27 October 2004 22:25, Han Boetes wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >The people from the OpenBSD project are currently lobbying to get
> > the firmware for Intel wireless chipsets under a license suitable
> > for Open Source.
> >
> >Since this will not only benefit BSD but also the Linux Project (and
> >even Intel) I would like to mention the URL here for people who want
> > to help writing to Intel.
> >
> > http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20041027193425
> >
> Please be aware that for the so-called "software radios"
> chips/chipsets, the FCC, and other similar regulating bodies in other
> countries has made access to the data quite restrictive in an attempt
> to keep the less ruly among us from putting them on frequencies they
> aren't authorized to use, or to set the power levels above whats
> allowed. These restrictions can vary from governing body to
> governing body so the software is generally supplied according to
> where the chipset is being shipped. The potential for mischief, and
> legal/monetary reprecussions is sufficiently great that I have
> serious doubts that Intel will budge from their current position
> unless we can prove, beyond any doubt, that the regulatory
> limitations imposed will not be violated.
>
> Since open source, where anyone who can read the code can see exactly
> what the limits are, and 'adjust to suit', virtually guarantees
> miss-use, sooner if not later, for no other reason than its human
> nature to experiment, Intel/moto/etc therefore has very good reasons
> to treat its chip<->software interface as highly secret &
> proprietary.

However, disassemblers do exist. Hiding secrets in binary .o
files is silly.

--
vda
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

• Previous message: Al Viro: "massive cross-builds without too much PITA"
• In reply to: Gene Heskett: "Re: Intel also needs convincing on firmware licensing."
• Next in thread: Dax Kelson: "Re: Intel also needs convincing on firmware licensing."
• Reply: Dax Kelson: "Re: Intel also needs convincing on firmware licensing."
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]