3 ms·

It's basically taking the blobs that would be normally shipped with the OS in a sensible manner, shuffle it around, then calling it "free" while the same blobs

It's basically taking the blobs that would be normally shipped with the OS in a sensible manner, shuffle it around, then calling it "free" while the same blobs would still be there, just on different flash storage chips.

deleted 5mo ago
[deleted]
fsflover 5mo ago
> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47943487 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47943487 You keep repeating this everywhere. Consider reading what a Librem 5 developer says instead, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47943487 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47943487
- TommyTran732 5mo ago
  Because it's true, and I know what he said, I am not confused at all. Did you not read anything at all? On the Librem laptop, the tampering is done by PureBoot and inject into /run/firmware. The other user was linking the stuff with the laptop. *On a Librem 5, it is stored on a separate chip, then they read it with the initramfs, then mount it on top of the regular filesystem at /lib/firmware*. Like I said, it's just shuffling stuff around. Here is the actual code, if you care enough to read it: https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/librem5-fw-jail/-/blob/pureos/byzantium/usr/share/initramfs-tools/scripts/local-bottom/librem5-mount-fw-jail?ref_type=heads https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/librem5-fw-jail/-/blob/pureos... If you can't read code, here is the marketing material: https://puri.sm/posts/shipping-new-sparklan-wifi-cards-with-librem-5/ https://puri.sm/posts/shipping-new-sparklan-wifi-cards-with-... If you don't know that the firmware for components/peripherals can either be uploaded to them by Linux or just stored on some flash chip on the component, read: https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/developer-library/reference/security/firmware-updating/ https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/developer-library/refer...
  - fsflover 5mo ago
    I'm tired of arguing with you. I see no effort from your side to come to some understanding or to clarify anything. Here's why. > On the Librem laptop, the tampering is done by PureBoot What do you mean by "tampering" here? Is uploading firmware to peripherals a "tampering"? Why is this a problem, compared with other devices? Does anybof those blobs run on the CPU? I don't understand what you are trying to say. > If you don't know that the firmware for components/peripherals can either be I do know. How is this relevant? I never denied that the device does have some proprietary blobs.
    - TommyTran732 5mo ago
      > I see no effort from your side to come to some understanding or to clarify anything. Accusing me of your own sins. > What do you mean by "tampering" here? Is uploading firmware to peripherals a "tampering"? Why is this a problem, compared with other devices? Does anybof those blobs run on the CPU? I don't understand what you are trying to say. On the laptop, messing with the system memory (/run) and dumping firmware packages in there instead of just shipping it with the OS using a sensible approach like the linux-firmware package is a hack-job and nasty practice. And since it's messing with system memory, that's your "tampering" right there. On the phone, once again, instead of using a normal, sensible approach like the linux-firmware package on desktop Linux or the vendor partition on Android, they just store the firmware in some chip, then have the OS (or more accurately, the initramfs) mount the content of the chip using overlayfs in /lib/firmware anyways. It's another implementation of the same hackjob. That, and they combine it with using peripherals whose firmware are stored inside of internal flash chips so the OS doesn't have to be shipped with firmware packages that it then needs to load into the peripherals. What does this entire exercise do for freedom or openness? *Asbolutely nothing*. It's called shuffling the firmware storage around so you can market the OS as "blob free" when it's literally meaningless. If anything, it makes it harder to audit and figure out which firmware version is being run than if the firmware were to be shipped along with the OS. --- To dumb it down a notch if you really do not understand what I am trying to say: This makes about as much sense as if I were to take the SSD out of my laptop, destroy the M.2 socket, then advertise it as a "storage free and OS free laptop". To use the laptop, you must plug in external storage through the USB port and load up an OS. But hey, since there is no SSD or OS on the "main" part of the laptop, I am now qualified for some made up certification and can advertise my stuff as "freeing" the user from the shackles of the evil storage system and nastiness of having an OS. Definitely more "open" than other laptops.

deleted 5mo ago

[deleted]

fsflover 5mo ago

> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47943487 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47943487 You keep repeating this everywhere. Consider reading what a Librem 5 developer says instead, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47943487 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47943487

TommyTran732 5mo ago
Because it's true, and I know what he said, I am not confused at all. Did you not read anything at all? On the Librem laptop, the tampering is done by PureBoot and inject into /run/firmware. The other user was linking the stuff with the laptop. *On a Librem 5, it is stored on a separate chip, then they read it with the initramfs, then mount it on top of the regular filesystem at /lib/firmware*. Like I said, it's just shuffling stuff around. Here is the actual code, if you care enough to read it: https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/librem5-fw-jail/-/blob/pureos/byzantium/usr/share/initramfs-tools/scripts/local-bottom/librem5-mount-fw-jail?ref_type=heads https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/librem5-fw-jail/-/blob/pureos... If you can't read code, here is the marketing material: https://puri.sm/posts/shipping-new-sparklan-wifi-cards-with-librem-5/ https://puri.sm/posts/shipping-new-sparklan-wifi-cards-with-... If you don't know that the firmware for components/peripherals can either be uploaded to them by Linux or just stored on some flash chip on the component, read: https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/developer-library/reference/security/firmware-updating/ https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/developer-library/refer...
- fsflover 5mo ago
  I'm tired of arguing with you. I see no effort from your side to come to some understanding or to clarify anything. Here's why. > On the Librem laptop, the tampering is done by PureBoot What do you mean by "tampering" here? Is uploading firmware to peripherals a "tampering"? Why is this a problem, compared with other devices? Does anybof those blobs run on the CPU? I don't understand what you are trying to say. > If you don't know that the firmware for components/peripherals can either be I do know. How is this relevant? I never denied that the device does have some proprietary blobs.
  - TommyTran732 5mo ago
    > I see no effort from your side to come to some understanding or to clarify anything. Accusing me of your own sins. > What do you mean by "tampering" here? Is uploading firmware to peripherals a "tampering"? Why is this a problem, compared with other devices? Does anybof those blobs run on the CPU? I don't understand what you are trying to say. On the laptop, messing with the system memory (/run) and dumping firmware packages in there instead of just shipping it with the OS using a sensible approach like the linux-firmware package is a hack-job and nasty practice. And since it's messing with system memory, that's your "tampering" right there. On the phone, once again, instead of using a normal, sensible approach like the linux-firmware package on desktop Linux or the vendor partition on Android, they just store the firmware in some chip, then have the OS (or more accurately, the initramfs) mount the content of the chip using overlayfs in /lib/firmware anyways. It's another implementation of the same hackjob. That, and they combine it with using peripherals whose firmware are stored inside of internal flash chips so the OS doesn't have to be shipped with firmware packages that it then needs to load into the peripherals. What does this entire exercise do for freedom or openness? *Asbolutely nothing*. It's called shuffling the firmware storage around so you can market the OS as "blob free" when it's literally meaningless. If anything, it makes it harder to audit and figure out which firmware version is being run than if the firmware were to be shipped along with the OS. --- To dumb it down a notch if you really do not understand what I am trying to say: This makes about as much sense as if I were to take the SSD out of my laptop, destroy the M.2 socket, then advertise it as a "storage free and OS free laptop". To use the laptop, you must plug in external storage through the USB port and load up an OS. But hey, since there is no SSD or OS on the "main" part of the laptop, I am now qualified for some made up certification and can advertise my stuff as "freeing" the user from the shackles of the evil storage system and nastiness of having an OS. Definitely more "open" than other laptops.