13 ms·

Reminder that linux-libre also removes warnings in the kernel that you're running outdated CPU microcode, because the FSF doesn't believe users should be inform

Reminder that linux-libre also removes warnings in the kernel that you're running outdated CPU microcode, because the FSF doesn't believe users should be informed about updates (some of which are security critical) to proprietary software they are already running anyway. Make of that what you will.

netizen-936824 5y ago
That's a bit concerning. Has anyone written about this somewhere? I'm guessing I'm not the only one who's had their interest piqued considering the large FOSS community here
- marcan_42 5y ago
  Last time I tried to go into more depth about this one and related policy failings of the FSF and their associated projects here, it predictably descended into a long flamewar with FSF supporters, so I'll pass on it this time. But here's a link: https://twitter.com/mjg59/status/1377402589386432512?s=20 https://twitter.com/mjg59/status/1377402589386432512?s=20
  - netizen-936824 5y ago
    Thank you! I'm a supporter of the FSF and FOSS but I also think these ideologies have to be taken in consideration with security tradeoffs and current mitigation implementations. Free software is wonderful, but we should be honest about its capability to respond to some security threats like this. I think it would be better to include such warnings, even if it included an extra 'proprietary blob' warning.
    - marcan_42 5y ago
      Agreed. I'm a strong supporter of FOSS, from a pragmatic point of view of how it helps users and gives them more freedom. I do not believe ideological arguments against proprietary software should be used to make technical decisions that limit users' options or keep them uninformed, because the freedom to choose to use proprietary software is also important. Plus, the current policies of the FSF are completely inconsistent, out of touch with the reality of computing systems today, and based on arbitrary rules that end up reducing user freedom instead of increasing it (e.g. how they promote devices with firmware ROMs - which you do not have the freedom to inspect, modify, or replace with a free version - while deriding devices with firmware RAM and a blob, where you do have those freedoms).
      - lovelyviking 5y ago
        >Plus, the current policies of the FSF are completely inconsistent, out of touch with the reality of computing systems today, and based on arbitrary rules that end up reducing user freedom instead of increasing it (e.g. how they promote devices with firmware ROMs - which you do not have the freedom to inspect, modify, or replace with a free version - while deriding devices with firmware RAM and a blob, where you do have those freedoms). I would agree about inconsistency and say that unless everything is absolutely transparent including microcode and hardware it is not acceptable as freedom respecting solution. On the other hand isn't FSF do compromise as you wanted when you say: "I do not believe ideological arguments against proprietary software should be used to ... "
        not2b 5y ago
        A consistent approach would forbid any use of Intel, AMD, or ARM processors (proprietary microcode in all of them) as well as any wireless technology (again, proprietary firmware). But the FSF has decided that if they can pretend that any proprietary code is somehow unchangeable hardware, or if not, if they don't tell people how to change it or if they even encourage vendors to prevent changing it, this somehow supports freedom.
        ece 5y ago
        Or they're incentivizing firmware-less or open-firmware devices, while drawing a line where people can still choose certain devices that meet their purpose.
        marcan_42 5y ago
        But they aren't doing that; their Respects Your Freedom program is chock full of devices that run giant firmware blobs, which they conveniently ignore as long as they're on-device and not loaded from /lib/firmware, because as long as nobody notices they can keep believing they're living a blob-free life... Things the FSF has explicitly incentivized: - Moving firmware blobs from an obvious, inspectable place in the OS or bootloder to obscure firmware ROMs or Flash chips read by a convoluted process involving multiple CPUs, because somehow doing the latter makes it freedom-respecting? (Librem 5 story) - Physically destroying optional hardware that currently cannot be used without blobs, so users are not tempted to use those blobs, regardless of whether free alternatives might appear in the future (spoiler alert: they did) (Stallman trying to get bunnie to permanently disable the GPU in the Novena free hardware/software laptop to get certified).
sporedro 5y ago
I get where they’re coming from, but this just sounds insane. If there were FOSS CPU microcode that could replace it or something and they only wanted to support that than fine, but if there’s no FOSS option why create security risks for users? I love the FOSS community, but sometimes their rationale is a bit too extreme for the average person to get behind.
- gjsman-1000 5y ago
  “is a bit too extreme” Understatement of the year. You are a dev who wants to make some money on the side and keeps her software proprietary because monetizing open-source is a rare exception than the rule? F!@# her and her lack of ethics! And don’t touch her software, or her, with a 10 foot pole, let alone pay for it! Oh, there’s a proprietary firmware blob that this device requires, but it runs off onboard flash so the OS doesn’t see it? Perfectly fine! If the OS doesn’t see it, see no evil, speak no evil, there is no evil. The FSF are the Puritans of the 21st century. Both in extremity and hypocrisy.
  - quadrangle 5y ago
    What a reactive, defensive attitude. Just try applying everything you wrote to the topic of being vegetarian. Vegetarians are indeed arguing against meat-eating, and you could talk about how you are just some pig farmer selling meat on the side, and the vegetarians are saying "F You!" And then there's the practical problems with whether animal products are identified in various food products… And people get super defensive about that stuff too. But this desire to reject the FSF or the vegetarians and call them extremists and hypocrites amounts to an emotional refusal to engage fairly with any of the actual issues or even what the people are actually saying or doing.
    - gjsman-1000 5y ago
      Nothing I said was not true. The FSF encourages all members to shun proprietary software of any kind - which is why we have Linux-Libre and Trisquel. Even though, to put it simply, monetizing open source is very rare and the FSF looks down on people (including solo programmers) with the gall to keep their software proprietary. The FSF is also a complete hypocrite when it comes to firmware. Proprietary firmware which the OS can’t see (because it is loaded from onboard flash) is compliant with their “Respects Your Freedom” hardware certification, which is asinine and actively reduces my freedom to reverse-engineer that firmware or replace it with an open driver. According to FSF logic, a solo programmer making proprietary software for money is to be shunned. A device with an embedded proprietary blob could be certified as freedom-respecting and tolerable. That’s retarded.
adffadsfdd 5y ago
> Reminder that linux-libre also removes warnings in the kernel that you're running outdated CPU microcode, News to me. Maybe you a few links showing this?

netizen-936824 5y ago

That's a bit concerning. Has anyone written about this somewhere? I'm guessing I'm not the only one who's had their interest piqued considering the large FOSS community here

marcan_42 5y ago
Last time I tried to go into more depth about this one and related policy failings of the FSF and their associated projects here, it predictably descended into a long flamewar with FSF supporters, so I'll pass on it this time. But here's a link: https://twitter.com/mjg59/status/1377402589386432512?s=20 https://twitter.com/mjg59/status/1377402589386432512?s=20
- netizen-936824 5y ago
  Thank you! I'm a supporter of the FSF and FOSS but I also think these ideologies have to be taken in consideration with security tradeoffs and current mitigation implementations. Free software is wonderful, but we should be honest about its capability to respond to some security threats like this. I think it would be better to include such warnings, even if it included an extra 'proprietary blob' warning.
  - marcan_42 5y ago
    Agreed. I'm a strong supporter of FOSS, from a pragmatic point of view of how it helps users and gives them more freedom. I do not believe ideological arguments against proprietary software should be used to make technical decisions that limit users' options or keep them uninformed, because the freedom to choose to use proprietary software is also important. Plus, the current policies of the FSF are completely inconsistent, out of touch with the reality of computing systems today, and based on arbitrary rules that end up reducing user freedom instead of increasing it (e.g. how they promote devices with firmware ROMs - which you do not have the freedom to inspect, modify, or replace with a free version - while deriding devices with firmware RAM and a blob, where you do have those freedoms).
    - lovelyviking 5y ago
      >Plus, the current policies of the FSF are completely inconsistent, out of touch with the reality of computing systems today, and based on arbitrary rules that end up reducing user freedom instead of increasing it (e.g. how they promote devices with firmware ROMs - which you do not have the freedom to inspect, modify, or replace with a free version - while deriding devices with firmware RAM and a blob, where you do have those freedoms). I would agree about inconsistency and say that unless everything is absolutely transparent including microcode and hardware it is not acceptable as freedom respecting solution. On the other hand isn't FSF do compromise as you wanted when you say: "I do not believe ideological arguments against proprietary software should be used to ... "
      - not2b 5y ago
        A consistent approach would forbid any use of Intel, AMD, or ARM processors (proprietary microcode in all of them) as well as any wireless technology (again, proprietary firmware). But the FSF has decided that if they can pretend that any proprietary code is somehow unchangeable hardware, or if not, if they don't tell people how to change it or if they even encourage vendors to prevent changing it, this somehow supports freedom.
        ece 5y ago
        Or they're incentivizing firmware-less or open-firmware devices, while drawing a line where people can still choose certain devices that meet their purpose.
        marcan_42 5y ago
        But they aren't doing that; their Respects Your Freedom program is chock full of devices that run giant firmware blobs, which they conveniently ignore as long as they're on-device and not loaded from /lib/firmware, because as long as nobody notices they can keep believing they're living a blob-free life... Things the FSF has explicitly incentivized: - Moving firmware blobs from an obvious, inspectable place in the OS or bootloder to obscure firmware ROMs or Flash chips read by a convoluted process involving multiple CPUs, because somehow doing the latter makes it freedom-respecting? (Librem 5 story) - Physically destroying optional hardware that currently cannot be used without blobs, so users are not tempted to use those blobs, regardless of whether free alternatives might appear in the future (spoiler alert: they did) (Stallman trying to get bunnie to permanently disable the GPU in the Novena free hardware/software laptop to get certified).

sporedro 5y ago

I get where they’re coming from, but this just sounds insane. If there were FOSS CPU microcode that could replace it or something and they only wanted to support that than fine, but if there’s no FOSS option why create security risks for users? I love the FOSS community, but sometimes their rationale is a bit too extreme for the average person to get behind.

gjsman-1000 5y ago
“is a bit too extreme” Understatement of the year. You are a dev who wants to make some money on the side and keeps her software proprietary because monetizing open-source is a rare exception than the rule? F!@# her and her lack of ethics! And don’t touch her software, or her, with a 10 foot pole, let alone pay for it! Oh, there’s a proprietary firmware blob that this device requires, but it runs off onboard flash so the OS doesn’t see it? Perfectly fine! If the OS doesn’t see it, see no evil, speak no evil, there is no evil. The FSF are the Puritans of the 21st century. Both in extremity and hypocrisy.
- quadrangle 5y ago
  What a reactive, defensive attitude. Just try applying everything you wrote to the topic of being vegetarian. Vegetarians are indeed arguing against meat-eating, and you could talk about how you are just some pig farmer selling meat on the side, and the vegetarians are saying "F You!" And then there's the practical problems with whether animal products are identified in various food products… And people get super defensive about that stuff too. But this desire to reject the FSF or the vegetarians and call them extremists and hypocrites amounts to an emotional refusal to engage fairly with any of the actual issues or even what the people are actually saying or doing.
  - gjsman-1000 5y ago
    Nothing I said was not true. The FSF encourages all members to shun proprietary software of any kind - which is why we have Linux-Libre and Trisquel. Even though, to put it simply, monetizing open source is very rare and the FSF looks down on people (including solo programmers) with the gall to keep their software proprietary. The FSF is also a complete hypocrite when it comes to firmware. Proprietary firmware which the OS can’t see (because it is loaded from onboard flash) is compliant with their “Respects Your Freedom” hardware certification, which is asinine and actively reduces my freedom to reverse-engineer that firmware or replace it with an open driver. According to FSF logic, a solo programmer making proprietary software for money is to be shunned. A device with an embedded proprietary blob could be certified as freedom-respecting and tolerable. That’s retarded.

adffadsfdd 5y ago

> Reminder that linux-libre also removes warnings in the kernel that you're running outdated CPU microcode, News to me. Maybe you a few links showing this?