4 ms·

I'm not sure what exactly you're after, but much of firmware's responsibility is system initialization -- to be interested in open source firmware but be disint

I'm not sure what exactly you're after, but much of firmware's responsibility is system initialization -- to be interested in open source firmware but be disinterested in booting is to not understand firmware's role in a system. And certainly there is nothing at OSFC about "preventing" closed firmware -- the only way to do that is to not purchase devices that have compute elements in them. (Good luck!) And finally, if there's something different you would like to see at OSFC, submit a talk for OSFC 2024!

trinsic2 3y ago
My understanding of open firmware is making sure that the booting process is accessible to the user. Securing the boot process from intruders is secondary to that. It appears that these talks are more about securing the boot process, rather than talking about how to make the boot process more accessible. Secondly, these events looks like their geared toward the private sector, rather than enthusiasts. Why would I want to invest my time in contributing to a problem that is already made worse by commercial endeavors that seem to want to take control away from the user?
- pgeorgi 3y ago
  The OSFC is a direct outgrowth of the coreboot hackathons/conferences between 2014-2017, opening up to wider open source firmware topics. All the fun "how to open things up" subjects* have been talked to death in that community, so the conferences are now about questions like "how to improve on the state of the art in firmware?" * https://ecc2017.com/schedule-location https://ecc2017.com/schedule-location has the list of 2017 with gems like: DDR3 on Sandy Bridge, reversing Mediatek MT8173, reversing x86 microcode. 2016, with video links: https://www.coreboot.org/Coreboot_conference_San_Francisco_2016 https://www.coreboot.org/Coreboot_conference_San_Francisco_2... 2014-2015 don't have video, I think.
  - trinsic2 3y ago
    No disrespect intended, and you probably have good motives. I looked at those links and it still seems like the focus is on boot security, focused around ChromeOS. Regardless of whether or not the issue of "opening things up" has been talked to death in the coreboot/hackathon community (which sounds like a tactic to marginalize the enthusiast community), This is a critical topic right now for me, and i'm sure many others. Not everything is about providing security for embedded devices. I know this is an important topic for the commercial sector, but this push toward more security in the boot process seems more about locking people out of customizing their systems instead of providing security. IMHO, that is a terrible path to take if it becomes a standard for all computing, which many things seem to be heading in that direction.
    - kfreds 3y ago
      > This is a critical topic right now for me The people and projects surrounding the OSFC has been working tirelessly for many years on changing things for the better. I can personally attest to the fact that the people involved are incredibly passionate about open source firmware. Making firmware open source benefits vendors AND users. It serves commercial interests AND software freedom.
      - trinsic2 3y ago
        I'm noticing keywords like "tirelessly" "open source firmware" being used over and over without actually saying anything. Lots of generic terms, instead of being specific about what you mean. I don't mean to nitpick, but people that actually care about the future of technology and want to make things better usually talk in specific terms rather than throwing out unspecific terminology.
        bcantrill 3y ago
        "Tirelessly" is apt in this case. Please educate yourself about this community in general, and this conference in particular -- which I believe to be one of the best in tech: technically interesting, grounded in reality, relevant problems, terrific hallway track, supportive community, reasonable price!
        pgeorgi 3y ago
        I've been dealing with silicon vendors (Intel, AMD, some ARM implementers, a couple of other folks) on the subject of open source firmware (as in: GPLv2) for 15 years (as in: tirelessly). I've been arguing against locked boot processes behind the scenes and in public (e.g. https://patrick.georgi.family/2015/02/17/intel-boot-guard/ https://patrick.georgi.family/2015/02/17/intel-boot-guard/). I held talks at coreboot conferences, even though I despise the spotlight. That said: 15 years of activity is a lot of work to unpack in "specific terms", so "unspecified terminology" that still provides a rough overview it is.
        sobkas 3y ago
- wmf 3y ago
  Open source firmware is mostly funded by hyperscalers; the consumer side (Purism/System76/Dasharo) is a small sideshow in comparison (for now). Ultimately open source firmware is less locked-down than proprietary firmware and the way to encourage more openness in the future is to buy open source firmware now. Is there any specific feature you want?

trinsic2 3y ago

My understanding of open firmware is making sure that the booting process is accessible to the user. Securing the boot process from intruders is secondary to that. It appears that these talks are more about securing the boot process, rather than talking about how to make the boot process more accessible. Secondly, these events looks like their geared toward the private sector, rather than enthusiasts. Why would I want to invest my time in contributing to a problem that is already made worse by commercial endeavors that seem to want to take control away from the user?

pgeorgi 3y ago
The OSFC is a direct outgrowth of the coreboot hackathons/conferences between 2014-2017, opening up to wider open source firmware topics. All the fun "how to open things up" subjects* have been talked to death in that community, so the conferences are now about questions like "how to improve on the state of the art in firmware?" * https://ecc2017.com/schedule-location https://ecc2017.com/schedule-location has the list of 2017 with gems like: DDR3 on Sandy Bridge, reversing Mediatek MT8173, reversing x86 microcode. 2016, with video links: https://www.coreboot.org/Coreboot_conference_San_Francisco_2016 https://www.coreboot.org/Coreboot_conference_San_Francisco_2... 2014-2015 don't have video, I think.
- trinsic2 3y ago
  No disrespect intended, and you probably have good motives. I looked at those links and it still seems like the focus is on boot security, focused around ChromeOS. Regardless of whether or not the issue of "opening things up" has been talked to death in the coreboot/hackathon community (which sounds like a tactic to marginalize the enthusiast community), This is a critical topic right now for me, and i'm sure many others. Not everything is about providing security for embedded devices. I know this is an important topic for the commercial sector, but this push toward more security in the boot process seems more about locking people out of customizing their systems instead of providing security. IMHO, that is a terrible path to take if it becomes a standard for all computing, which many things seem to be heading in that direction.
  - kfreds 3y ago
    > This is a critical topic right now for me The people and projects surrounding the OSFC has been working tirelessly for many years on changing things for the better. I can personally attest to the fact that the people involved are incredibly passionate about open source firmware. Making firmware open source benefits vendors AND users. It serves commercial interests AND software freedom.
    - trinsic2 3y ago
      I'm noticing keywords like "tirelessly" "open source firmware" being used over and over without actually saying anything. Lots of generic terms, instead of being specific about what you mean. I don't mean to nitpick, but people that actually care about the future of technology and want to make things better usually talk in specific terms rather than throwing out unspecific terminology.
      - bcantrill 3y ago
        "Tirelessly" is apt in this case. Please educate yourself about this community in general, and this conference in particular -- which I believe to be one of the best in tech: technically interesting, grounded in reality, relevant problems, terrific hallway track, supportive community, reasonable price!
      - pgeorgi 3y ago
        I've been dealing with silicon vendors (Intel, AMD, some ARM implementers, a couple of other folks) on the subject of open source firmware (as in: GPLv2) for 15 years (as in: tirelessly). I've been arguing against locked boot processes behind the scenes and in public (e.g. https://patrick.georgi.family/2015/02/17/intel-boot-guard/ https://patrick.georgi.family/2015/02/17/intel-boot-guard/). I held talks at coreboot conferences, even though I despise the spotlight. That said: 15 years of activity is a lot of work to unpack in "specific terms", so "unspecified terminology" that still provides a rough overview it is.
        sobkas 3y ago
wmf 3y ago
Open source firmware is mostly funded by hyperscalers; the consumer side (Purism/System76/Dasharo) is a small sideshow in comparison (for now). Ultimately open source firmware is less locked-down than proprietary firmware and the way to encourage more openness in the future is to buy open source firmware now. Is there any specific feature you want?