3 ms·

> That is about as simple as librebooting gets. I had a nice chuckle at this. Buying chip clips? A separate Raspberry Pi to wire everything together and perfor

> That is about as simple as librebooting gets. I had a nice chuckle at this. Buying chip clips? A separate Raspberry Pi to wire everything together and perform the flashing process? Is there really no chance of some kind of click-and-reboot process, same as how official proprietary firmware gets updated?

deaddodo 2y ago
As long as Flash Write Protection is a thing and the default Lenovo BIOS enables it, yes that is how it goes.
Almondsetat 2y ago
There are some boards where librebooting can be done entirely via software
rollcat 2y ago
Hackability is always at odds with physical security. The general rule of thumb for the security-paranoid is that once you lose sight of your device, you should assume it's been owned (any imaginable variant/combination of evil maid, DMA exploit thru a physical port, etc). In recent years there has been a steady push to raise the bar (TPM, SecureBoot, etc). Whether that's effective for protecting the median user's privacy and security is a separate matter, but the side effect is of course that this is increasingly becoming a hurdle for power users, enthusiasts, OS developers, etc. ARM Macs are at a very weird spot on this spectrum. On one hand, we have a new, bespoke, and undocumented system architecture, and keeping a macOS partition is a requirement to continue receiving firmware updates; on the other, Apple has left a clearly labeled escape hatch for OS developers, and kept it from accidentally breaking. You can't have a fully libre boot chain, but it's not like Lenovo (or most other PC vendors) would endorse that either.
- mschuster91 2y ago
  Personal opinion: flash chips of all kinds should be write-protected so that even a clip flash does not work... but they should have an authentication mechanism with, say, a 64 bytes passphrase that the end-user gets on a keycard. That way you'd need a literal "evil maid" in the household of the owner to do any modifications that might compromise the device.
  - rollcat 2y ago
    From consumer electronics PoV, this is a complex and brittle measure; for simple on-board microcontrollers, write-protect could be established with a basic e-fuse. But even with e-fuses, we're talking fractions of a cent per unit, which adds up at scale - there will always be a cut-off point where a company will pursue margins instead. Meanwhile, exploding pagers.
    - ajb 2y ago
      These days most such chips have write protect in built in. They don't need efuses because they can just use flash bits and extra logic at negligible cost
  - ce4 2y ago
    That doesnt solve stuff. I had to desolder the SOIC8 chip in an X220 because my programmer didnt like the power draw of the remaining attached circuitry that consumed additional power. I also upgraded OpenWrt Routers by soldering bigger RAM and bigger flash chips in the past
    - ranma42 2y ago
      > I also upgraded OpenWrt Routers by soldering bigger RAM and bigger flash chips in the past Sadly this is harder than it used to be because with devicetree the flash size is hardcoded, where before it was auto-detected (so previously you could swap the flash and continue to use stock firmware, not you need to compile custom firmware).
  - ryukoposting 2y ago
    This is simultaneously complex, hostile to the consumer, and a non-solution to the given problem. Write protection protects the chip, not the computer. And, do you seriously expect anyone to remember where they put those cards? What happens when those computers get re-sold used, and the new owner doesn't get the card with the computer?
  - gosub100 2y ago
    What you're describing isn't that much different than using cryptographic signatures. Give up control of the chip and let em write whatever they want to it, but only use the data if it was signed by some private key. This is better for libre too, because you can manage your own keys (presuming you can get root access to whatever low level controller reads and loads the flash).
bubblethink 2y ago
Subsequent updates can be. The original flashing process has to be this way for everything other than chromebooks.
numpad0 2y ago
It's just more straightforward and robust that way, because you won't be exploiting anything but using a product as the (ROM chip)manufacturer intended. Software's come too complicated these days.
devops99 2y ago
What else would you like to put on the wish list for Santa?
yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago
Yeah, I have a Chromebook where the process to switch to coreboot was basically unscrew a write-protect screw (AIUI newer models might not even need that) and then you just run an installer script. That's a (...kinda) different particular firmware, but the process works. It just depends on your hardware.

deaddodo 2y ago

As long as Flash Write Protection is a thing and the default Lenovo BIOS enables it, yes that is how it goes.

Almondsetat 2y ago

There are some boards where librebooting can be done entirely via software

rollcat 2y ago

Hackability is always at odds with physical security. The general rule of thumb for the security-paranoid is that once you lose sight of your device, you should assume it's been owned (any imaginable variant/combination of evil maid, DMA exploit thru a physical port, etc). In recent years there has been a steady push to raise the bar (TPM, SecureBoot, etc). Whether that's effective for protecting the median user's privacy and security is a separate matter, but the side effect is of course that this is increasingly becoming a hurdle for power users, enthusiasts, OS developers, etc. ARM Macs are at a very weird spot on this spectrum. On one hand, we have a new, bespoke, and undocumented system architecture, and keeping a macOS partition is a requirement to continue receiving firmware updates; on the other, Apple has left a clearly labeled escape hatch for OS developers, and kept it from accidentally breaking. You can't have a fully libre boot chain, but it's not like Lenovo (or most other PC vendors) would endorse that either.

mschuster91 2y ago
Personal opinion: flash chips of all kinds should be write-protected so that even a clip flash does not work... but they should have an authentication mechanism with, say, a 64 bytes passphrase that the end-user gets on a keycard. That way you'd need a literal "evil maid" in the household of the owner to do any modifications that might compromise the device.
- rollcat 2y ago
  From consumer electronics PoV, this is a complex and brittle measure; for simple on-board microcontrollers, write-protect could be established with a basic e-fuse. But even with e-fuses, we're talking fractions of a cent per unit, which adds up at scale - there will always be a cut-off point where a company will pursue margins instead. Meanwhile, exploding pagers.
  - ajb 2y ago
    These days most such chips have write protect in built in. They don't need efuses because they can just use flash bits and extra logic at negligible cost
- ce4 2y ago
  That doesnt solve stuff. I had to desolder the SOIC8 chip in an X220 because my programmer didnt like the power draw of the remaining attached circuitry that consumed additional power. I also upgraded OpenWrt Routers by soldering bigger RAM and bigger flash chips in the past
  - ranma42 2y ago
    > I also upgraded OpenWrt Routers by soldering bigger RAM and bigger flash chips in the past Sadly this is harder than it used to be because with devicetree the flash size is hardcoded, where before it was auto-detected (so previously you could swap the flash and continue to use stock firmware, not you need to compile custom firmware).
- ryukoposting 2y ago
  This is simultaneously complex, hostile to the consumer, and a non-solution to the given problem. Write protection protects the chip, not the computer. And, do you seriously expect anyone to remember where they put those cards? What happens when those computers get re-sold used, and the new owner doesn't get the card with the computer?
- gosub100 2y ago
  What you're describing isn't that much different than using cryptographic signatures. Give up control of the chip and let em write whatever they want to it, but only use the data if it was signed by some private key. This is better for libre too, because you can manage your own keys (presuming you can get root access to whatever low level controller reads and loads the flash).

bubblethink 2y ago

Subsequent updates can be. The original flashing process has to be this way for everything other than chromebooks.

numpad0 2y ago

It's just more straightforward and robust that way, because you won't be exploiting anything but using a product as the (ROM chip)manufacturer intended. Software's come too complicated these days.

devops99 2y ago

What else would you like to put on the wish list for Santa?

yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago

Yeah, I have a Chromebook where the process to switch to coreboot was basically unscrew a write-protect screw (AIUI newer models might not even need that) and then you just run an installer script. That's a (...kinda) different particular firmware, but the process works. It just depends on your hardware.