America's crackdown on open-source Wi-Fi router firmware – THE TRUTH and how to get involved UPDATED

[dorsetknob]

Story here
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/09/05/fcc_software_updates/

And it looks like BAD NEWS

No more DDWRT no more Tomato no more Open source firmware

 

[Easo]

The moment I see titles like" THE TRUTH" I don't even want to read the post.

 

[Aquinus]

This sounds like a stretch. To me, it sounds like the FCC wants to lock down the wireless radios themselves to ensure compliance with FCC laws regarding how radio frequencies can be used and at what frequencies. While I can see this being an excuse to kill open source firmwares (or the OS for routers,) I think it might be a stretch. I see this being a change on the wireless transceivers themselves. So for example, the radio itself would simply prohibit broadcasting frequencies outside the range the FCC has allowed for the device.

So while I can see why person might be concerned, I don't see it as killing open source router software. I do see it as ensuring regulatory compliance of said software though.

Personally, I think it's important that a 2.4Ghz radio, only actually operates at 2.4Ghz. We have to be careful with how we use radio waves as we have to share the medium they travel in (unless talking about something like coaxial cable where radio waves inside are shielded from the outside and vise versa.)

 

[newtekie1]

This sounds like a stretch. To me, it sounds like the FCC wants to lock down the wireless radios themselves to ensure compliance with FCC laws regarding how radio frequencies can be used and at what frequencies. While I can see this being an excuse to kill open source firmwares (or the OS for routers,) I think it might be a stretch. I see this being a change on the wireless transceivers themselves. So for example, the radio itself would simply prohibit broadcasting frequencies outside the range the FCC has allowed for the device.

So while I can see why person might be concerned, I don't see it as killing open source router software. I do see it as ensuring regulatory compliance of said software though.

Personally, I think it's important that a 2.4Ghz radio, only actually operates at 2.4Ghz. We have to be careful with how we use radio waves as we have to share the medium they travel in (unless talking about something like coaxial cable where radio waves inside are shielded from the outside and vise versa.)

The problem arises because in the US, and a few other countries, you are limited to the frequencies you are allowed to use for WiFi. Even though they are labeled as 2.4GHz, they actually operate at a range of difference frequencies, this is why we have channels. That range in the US is limited to 2.412Ghz to 2.462GHz, or channels 1 - 11. However, in other countries the range is 2.412GHz to 2.484GHz, adding channels 12, 13, and 14. A lot of 3rd party, open source, firmwares allow people in the US to select those higher channels, which is technically illegal according to the FCC.

The radios themselves can't be limited, it isn't cost effective to build special units just for the US and a few other countries that limit the frequency range. So software is the only way to do it.

 

[Aquinus]

The radios themselves can't be limited, it isn't cost effective to build special units just for the US and a few other countries that limit the frequency range.

You're telling me that those mini-PCI-E wi-fi cards don't have an OPROM or some form of firmware that can't control that at the software level without involving the OS? I think that's a stretch because the device does have that kind of control at the firmware level. I'm just saying that it isn't as unrealistic as you claim it to be.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

I think it is legitimate for the reason newtekie1 pointed out and I also think there is a simple solution: Tomato and DDWRT need to be submitted to the FCC for compliance approval. I don't think it costs much, if anything, and I'm sure users will be willing to donate money to get it FCC approved.

 

[Aquinus]

I think it is legitimate for the reason newtekie1 pointed out and I also think there is a simple solution: Tomato and DDWRT need to be submitted to the FCC for compliance approval. I don't think it costs much, if anything, and I'm sure users will be willing to donate money to get it FCC approved.

Being open source, I'm skeptical that you could enforce what the FCC wants without doing it at a lower level. If someone has the source, they can simply re-enable it, recompile, and load it up but, at least if it's something on the wi-fi device itself that would require JTAG to program, you deter a lot of people from doing it.

 

[RejZoR]

They already restrict antenna power based on region they detect (or you select). And I've seen Tomato RAF overriding my selection when I picked another country. Don't get it why FCC needs to "test" them. Another bullshit money grabbing...

 

[newtekie1]

You're telling me that those mini-PCI-E wi-fi cards don't have an OPROM or some form of firmware that can't control that at the software level without involving the OS? I think that's a stretch because the device does have that kind of control at the firmware level. I'm just saying that it isn't as unrealistic as you claim it to be.

Yes, that is what I'm telling you. The channel is controlled by the driver the OS is using, there isn't a meaningful firmware on these chips.

 

[brandonwh64]

I remember when my dad was into CB radios and his friend got a visit from the FCC cause he was running a HUGE high range AMP and started stepping on local TV and radio stations.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Yeah, there's a reason the FCC exists and letting open source firmware run in the wild is liable to step on toes. FCC's job is to make sure all devices stay in their prescribed bandwidths.

The FCC isn't evil--they just need to work out something both parties can agree to that will enforce radio compliance.

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

It's not encouraging they made no attempt to contact DD-WRT devs especially after they singled them out. Feels like they're just going to steamroll this through.

 

[Jetster]

The manufactures know that who ever produces modifiable firmware will out sell all the others. Trust me this means nothing. They will leave the back door open

Personally I thing DD-WRT, Tomato have fallen behind. The new routers work fine and have solid firmware. This all started with Lynksys not being able to handle traffic with p2p.

 

[Solaris17]

Kinda. As far as I understand it though this is only for wireless broadcasting devices. I can run opensense untangle pfsense smoothwall too my hearts content as a router.

 

[remixedcat]

This sounds like a stretch. To me, it sounds like the FCC wants to lock down the wireless radios themselves to ensure compliance with FCC laws regarding how radio frequencies can be used and at what frequencies. While I can see this being an excuse to kill open source firmwares (or the OS for routers,) I think it might be a stretch. I see this being a change on the wireless transceivers themselves. So for example, the radio itself would simply prohibit broadcasting frequencies outside the range the FCC has allowed for the device.

So while I can see why person might be concerned, I don't see it as killing open source router software. I do see it as ensuring regulatory compliance of said software though.

Personally, I think it's important that a 2.4Ghz radio, only actually operates at 2.4Ghz. We have to be careful with how we use radio waves as we have to share the medium they travel in (unless talking about something like coaxial cable where radio waves inside are shielded from the outside and vise versa.)

blame co's like amped wireless for this that even released products without fcc certs, etc... one of thier RE's even was sold w.o fcc/UL cert.

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

The manufactures know that who ever produces modifiable firmware will out sell all the others. Trust me this means nothing. They will leave the back door open

Personally I thing DD-WRT, Tomato have fallen behind. The new routers work fine and have solid firmware. This all started with Lynksys not being able to handle traffic with p2p.

Last time I looked into it tomato was dead in the water with new device and feature support, but DD-WRT is back on top IF you happen to purchase the same router as a dev like Kong. The further away you get from those devices the more bugs you tend to run into.

 

[newtekie1]

Last time I looked into it tomato was dead in the water with new device and feature support, but DD-WRT is back on top IF you happen to purchase the same router as a dev like Kong. The further away you get from those devices the more bugs you tend to run into.

The original Tomato maybe, but Shibby and Toastman versions of Tomato are alive and well.

 

[OneMoar]

While this post is typical Register hyperbole
the FCC needs to keep there fucking hands out of this because no matter there intent they will make to royally screw everybody

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

The original Tomato maybe, but Shibby and Toastman versions of Tomato are alive and well.

Looking into it now - looks like that's very recent (May.) Interesting Toastman says he picked up the R7000. That's the same one Kong has. Good one for firmware support it seems. Glad I picked it one up.

 

[Makaveli]

The R7000 is great

i just picked one up running the Xvortex Asus Merlin firmware on it.

 

[Cybrnook2002]

What's happening now, and I have had a discussion with RMerlin about this in the XVortex thread (as that's what I am running on my R7000),is companies like broadcom will start (and are already starting) to encrypt the bootloader. So, no access to bootloader, no access to nvram, no access to opensource firmware. This is getting very similar to rooting android devices (and why you just can't on some hardware vendors ,wink wink Samsung)

Here's the thread where I started talking about it if you care to read:

3/4 of the way down the page is where it starts

Asuswrt-Merlin on Netgear R7000 - Start of Encryption

 

[remixedcat]

I guess more people will cling to older hardware and such and not upgrade to 802.11ac wave 2 and companies will go bankrupt at not making as much as they used to due to NOBODY buying new routers! WAY TO KILL THE ECNOMY FUCKTARDS!

 

[Ferrum Master]

I cannot see how it kills the WRT. It will just use an pre-cooked binary driver given from the manufacturer, as most devices do actually.

 

[remixedcat]

when it comes to shit like RSA signing and such that will change...

 

[Ferrum Master]

when it comes to shit like RSA signing and such that will change...

As long there is china and india and their market, where more channels are really vital... FCC can go screw themselves, they can't fight the demand.

The whole thing is a click bait IMHO. It is overrated.

The thing comes that I will take some dual port NUC(Or whatever ARM based solution... they become more and more powerful.) and turn it into a simple slackware machine...( still don't get why DDWRT is so popular as any linux does everything since dino age). In terms of power consumption the Bay Trail NUC eats even less than my current router while running 1080p kitten video due to proper p states.