3 ms·

What I criticize is that the GSM modem on the Arduino GSM shield (Quectel M10) comes with no open firmware for this baseband processor - thus it's owned by your

by wolfgke 13y ago

What I criticize is that the GSM modem on the Arduino GSM shield (Quectel M10) comes with no open firmware for this baseband processor - thus it's owned by your mobile network provider since he can update the firmware silently. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6722292 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6722292 for a more detailed discussion about that topic from about two weeks ago.

icebraining 13y ago
Would a mobile network provider allow an open firmware to connect to their network? Personally, I think it could be OK as long as the processor is contained (i.e., no open access to the main memory, reliable mechanism for fully shutting it down, etc).
- rsync 13y ago
  "Would a mobile network provider allow an open firmware to connect to their network?" They would likely not be happy about it. I assume it would be something like the relationship between tivo and people running hacked tivos ... a cat and mouse game that a bit of effort can keep you ahead of. BUT, instead of trying to bake up a ground-up open firmware, which would be wonderful but VERY difficult, better to just pick an existing firmware, like osmocom did with the (very old) calypso chipset. You would pick a firmware with very wide market penetration so that it is easy to get handsets, and then try to pick one that was easy to hack. So ... whatever very widely adopted firmware has the most holes in it.
  - gnaffle 13y ago
    I don't think they would really care unless you (or many others) started disrupting the network or abusing their services. Unlike Cable TV companies, network operators don't generally have a revenue stream that must be protected by locking down what you can do with the baseband. Whatever traffic filtering they do to keep Skype etc. out is done in the network.
sliverstorm 13y ago
it's owned by your mobile network provider since he can update the firmware silently Hardly unprecedented. Cable modems work the same way. It seems to make good sense to me; the provider is responsible for the performance of the network, and the client interface is a part of that network.
noselasd 13y ago
One problem is that there simply arn't anyone creating baseband chips which are "open". The closest thing is osmocom-bb, avaalable only for one (very old) chipset(which they had to reverse-engineered, with a big thanks to leaked documents on dodgy chinese websites). Another other issue is the carriers want the baseband chisets and protocol stacks certified before allowing it on their network.
captainmuon 13y ago
If someone would sell / kickstart a completely open GSM (or what cell phones use nowadays) module, I would be tempted to buy it. Not that I have much use for it ;-) It shouldn't be that hard. A million dollars, a few people who know about RF hardware, and the (possibly leaked) GSM specs should be enough. There might be some trouble with encryption / carrier's private keys, but I think that shouldn't be an issue, since a multiband GSM phone works with every strange operator in every remote country, as long as the frequency is supported. Some cool applications for a really free GSM from the top of my head: - Virtual SIMS, you only use the data from the SIM, not the physical card to login. (Might be tricky because the SIM protects its information. If you don't want to resort to attacks ala chip shaving and electron microscopes to get the keys, you might just setup a simless private network with a DIY SIM tower (that already exist, AFAIK), as a kind of proof-of-concept.) - You can see when you recieve a silent SMS ("type 0"), that authorities use to ping your phone to trace you. You can also send them. - You can record audio from and play it to the phone, which is not possible in most consumer phones - You can implement hardware encryption (which is tricky for voice, since GSM uses psychoaccoustical compression techniques that might not work on a encrypted stream - nevertheless this is a solved problem and there should be papers on this) - You would find a bunch of security holes in the network, since its been relying on obscurity and trusted devices for so long. - You could have a phone that's bottom to top trusted and open-source.
- greenlakejake 13y ago
  been done https://www.sparkfun.com/products/9533 https://www.sparkfun.com/products/9533
  - gnaffle 13y ago
    I don't think the firmware for that module is open source, which is what he wanted.
- gnaffle 13y ago
  There is an open GSM client stack in OsmocomBB: http://bb.osmocom.org/trac/wiki/Software/GettingStarted http://bb.osmocom.org/trac/wiki/Software/GettingStarted It only works with certain baseband chips though, but has already been used to crack the A5/1 GSM crypto: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrbatnnRxFc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrbatnnRxFc Many of the other things you mention can already be done by using off the shelf GSM baseband chips, since they don't necessarily do much access control of what gets sent.
thechut 13y ago
I saw David speak at OHS, and this project was more about building something cool and differently than trying to be open source and part of the Free/Libre movement.

by wolfgke 13y ago

icebraining 13y ago

Would a mobile network provider allow an open firmware to connect to their network? Personally, I think it could be OK as long as the processor is contained (i.e., no open access to the main memory, reliable mechanism for fully shutting it down, etc).

rsync 13y ago
"Would a mobile network provider allow an open firmware to connect to their network?" They would likely not be happy about it. I assume it would be something like the relationship between tivo and people running hacked tivos ... a cat and mouse game that a bit of effort can keep you ahead of. BUT, instead of trying to bake up a ground-up open firmware, which would be wonderful but VERY difficult, better to just pick an existing firmware, like osmocom did with the (very old) calypso chipset. You would pick a firmware with very wide market penetration so that it is easy to get handsets, and then try to pick one that was easy to hack. So ... whatever very widely adopted firmware has the most holes in it.
- gnaffle 13y ago
  I don't think they would really care unless you (or many others) started disrupting the network or abusing their services. Unlike Cable TV companies, network operators don't generally have a revenue stream that must be protected by locking down what you can do with the baseband. Whatever traffic filtering they do to keep Skype etc. out is done in the network.

sliverstorm 13y ago

it's owned by your mobile network provider since he can update the firmware silently Hardly unprecedented. Cable modems work the same way. It seems to make good sense to me; the provider is responsible for the performance of the network, and the client interface is a part of that network.

noselasd 13y ago

One problem is that there simply arn't anyone creating baseband chips which are "open". The closest thing is osmocom-bb, avaalable only for one (very old) chipset(which they had to reverse-engineered, with a big thanks to leaked documents on dodgy chinese websites). Another other issue is the carriers want the baseband chisets and protocol stacks certified before allowing it on their network.

captainmuon 13y ago

If someone would sell / kickstart a completely open GSM (or what cell phones use nowadays) module, I would be tempted to buy it. Not that I have much use for it ;-) It shouldn't be that hard. A million dollars, a few people who know about RF hardware, and the (possibly leaked) GSM specs should be enough. There might be some trouble with encryption / carrier's private keys, but I think that shouldn't be an issue, since a multiband GSM phone works with every strange operator in every remote country, as long as the frequency is supported. Some cool applications for a really free GSM from the top of my head: - Virtual SIMS, you only use the data from the SIM, not the physical card to login. (Might be tricky because the SIM protects its information. If you don't want to resort to attacks ala chip shaving and electron microscopes to get the keys, you might just setup a simless private network with a DIY SIM tower (that already exist, AFAIK), as a kind of proof-of-concept.) - You can see when you recieve a silent SMS ("type 0"), that authorities use to ping your phone to trace you. You can also send them. - You can record audio from and play it to the phone, which is not possible in most consumer phones - You can implement hardware encryption (which is tricky for voice, since GSM uses psychoaccoustical compression techniques that might not work on a encrypted stream - nevertheless this is a solved problem and there should be papers on this) - You would find a bunch of security holes in the network, since its been relying on obscurity and trusted devices for so long. - You could have a phone that's bottom to top trusted and open-source.

greenlakejake 13y ago
been done https://www.sparkfun.com/products/9533 https://www.sparkfun.com/products/9533
- gnaffle 13y ago
  I don't think the firmware for that module is open source, which is what he wanted.
gnaffle 13y ago
There is an open GSM client stack in OsmocomBB: http://bb.osmocom.org/trac/wiki/Software/GettingStarted http://bb.osmocom.org/trac/wiki/Software/GettingStarted It only works with certain baseband chips though, but has already been used to crack the A5/1 GSM crypto: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrbatnnRxFc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrbatnnRxFc Many of the other things you mention can already be done by using off the shelf GSM baseband chips, since they don't necessarily do much access control of what gets sent.

thechut 13y ago

I saw David speak at OHS, and this project was more about building something cool and differently than trying to be open source and part of the Free/Libre movement.