From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030255AbWA0CQM (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jan 2006 21:16:12 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030213AbWA0CQM (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jan 2006 21:16:12 -0500 Received: from mail.dvmed.net ([216.237.124.58]:31929 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030207AbWA0CQL (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jan 2006 21:16:11 -0500 Message-ID: <43D98259.8090406@pobox.com> Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 21:15:53 -0500 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.1.fc4 (X11/20050929) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Simon Barber CC: Michael Buesch , Ben Greear , David Hollis , "John W. Linville" , Samuel Ortiz , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel , Alan Cox Subject: wireless geo stuff (was Re: wireless-2.6 status (25 January 2006)) References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bad-Reply: References and In-Reply-To but no 'Re:' in Subject. X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "srv2.dvmed.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Simon Barber wrote: > In order to get FCC certification the manufacturer must ensure there is > no easy way for the user to tune to illegal frequencies. Broadcom has > done their job - it was not easy to reverse engineer their driver. Now > the cat is out of the bag. The open source driver is not illegal - > although it may be illegal to use it - since the chipset and driver were > likely certified together. I'm no expert in FCC regulation, so take all > of this with a pinch of salt. [...] Content analysis details: (0.1 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.1 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL RBL: SORBS: sent directly from dynamic IP address [69.134.188.146 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Simon Barber wrote: > In order to get FCC certification the manufacturer must ensure there is > no easy way for the user to tune to illegal frequencies. Broadcom has > done their job - it was not easy to reverse engineer their driver. Now > the cat is out of the bag. The open source driver is not illegal - > although it may be illegal to use it - since the chipset and driver were > likely certified together. I'm no expert in FCC regulation, so take all > of this with a pinch of salt. First, kernel developers should do the best they can to provide facilities to limit the frequencies, including sane and safe defaults for the softmac cases. It just makes sense to do that, from a "friendly neighbor" and "don't operate out of spec" perspective, if nothing else. It's damned _rude_ to use channels other than the ones selected by the Responsible Authority. Some ham radio operator -- like me -- might be using that frequency to carry on a pleasant Morse code conversation with someone else halfway across the world. Linux software shalt not be rude. :) Second, if someone takes steps to disable these safeguards we build in, that's akin to putting illegal crystals into a radio, or tuning a transmitter to police/emergency bands. Finally, binary-only software is clearly _not_ a barrier to this sort of circumvention. Reverse engineering x86 software is a skill that's very widespread, relative to other sorts of reverse engineering. Reverse engineering tools for the x86 are very mature these days, having had two decades to grow and flourish. If the _hardware_ can be programmed maliciously, there's not a whole lot you can do about it... particularly when the hardware manufacturer chooses a method of obfuscation (x86 code) practically designed for easy analysis. Jeff