5 ms·
> Individuals or organizations that are not eligible to sign CNDA with Intel, such as open source firmware maintainers. Many of them do actually have CNDAs sig
by boreboot 4y ago
> Individuals or organizations that are not eligible to sign CNDA with Intel, such as open source firmware maintainers.
Many of them do actually have CNDAs signed with Intel, at least those employed to work on commercial products based on Intel's chips. You'll see tons of references to NDA-only datasheet in coreboot's commit history.
- userbinator 4y agoYou'll see tons of references to NDA-only datasheet in coreboot's commit history. Isn't that really against the principles of open-source (and possibly the NDA itself)? It's a strange situation and why I'd rather manufacturers release datasheets instead of contributing to OSS. The source is technically "open" in the latter case, but in practice it's not much more informative than what you'd get if you just decompiled the binary.
- Kamq 4y ago> and possibly the NDA itself Depends on the NDA. A lot of NDAs won't require you to never mention that there is a thing that's under NDA, just from divulging the information in question.
- userbinator 4y agoI suppose that gets into the area of what counts as a derivative work. Given that "source code" which looks like decompiled binary wouldn't be of much informative value anyway, I can see how it wouldn't seem like it's leaking any NDA'd information.