[Mesh] Fwd: Re: [internet-freedom] openWRT vs. FCC - forced firmware lockdown?

Hi! Some more activity on this topic. The deadline for comments was extended until October 9. BTW, have you seen this article more or less in favor of FCC rule: https://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20150831/07164532118/no-fcc… Also, there is a mailing list for people interested in this topic: http://lists.prplfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fcc Mitar -------- Forwarded Message -------- From: Andrew McConachie <amcconachie(a)berkeley.edu> Subject: Re: [internet-freedom] openWRT vs. FCC - forced firmware lockdown? Hey Internet Freedomers, I wanted to provide an update on this as things have changed. The original language from the FCC that we discussed is no longer in the proposed rule change. The specific reference to DD-WRT has been removed, and it now looks like the below language is what governs this. "(i) For devices including modular transmitters which are software defined radios and use software to control the radio or other parameters subject to the Commission's rules, the description must include details of the equipment's capabilities for software modification and upgradeability, including all frequency bands, power levels, modulation types, or other modes of operation for which the device is designed to operate, whether or not the device will be initially marketed with all modes enabled. The description must state which parties will be authorized to make software changes (e.g., the grantee, wireless service providers, other authorized parties) and the software controls that are provided to prevent unauthorized parties from enabling different modes of operation. Manufacturers must describe the methods used in the device to secure the software in their application for equipment authorization and must include a high level operational description or flow diagram of the software that controls the radio frequency operating parameters. The applicant must provide an attestation that only permissible modes of operation may be selected by a user."[0] In my opinion the FCC has rightly limited their concern of software update to anything which relates to software controlled radios. The requirement for device manufacturers will be limited to showing that a software update cannot reprogram a software controlled radio to cause interference. In practice, this will most likely mean that binary drivers will be required to run OS's like OpenWRT, and manufacturers like Marvel/Avago will continue to obfuscate their hardware APIs. This is a compromise I think we're going to have to live with. Below is the comment I made to the FCC(tracking number 1jz-8kvr-4z96). " Please do not do anything to interfere with the development of OpenWRT, DD-WRT or similar alternative firmware. It is important that consumers maintain the right to change the OS of any devices they own. For the purposes of preventing spectrum interference it is necessary that software controlled radios not be easily reprogrammable. However, this requirement should in no way interfere with the legitimate right of consumers to change the general purpose OS's of their legally purchased devices. Sincerely, Andrew McConachie " Comments close on Sep 8, only 7 more days to go. Speak now or forever hold your bits. Also, if anyone knows someone at the LibrePlanet SaveWiFi wiki their page has the wrong comment deadline.[1] Their page says October 9, but the FCC deadline is September 8. Thanks, Andrew [0] https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2015/08/06/2015-18402/equipment-au… [1] https://libreplanet.org/wiki/Save_WiFi/Individual_Comments On 7/25/15 10:41 PM, Andrew McConachie wrote: -- http://mitar.tnode.com/ https://twitter.com/mitar_m