On 9 July 2015 at 12:15, Marcel Holtmann <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Jussi,
>
>>>> Now that we're talking about the online check... I've talked to people
>>>> who considered this behaviour "calling home" and thought it
>>>> unreasonable that
>>>>   a) it's not possible to prevent the online check from happening via
>>>> configuration and
>>>
>>>
>>> Why would you prevent it to happen? This check is something extra anyway,
>>> being "ready" means you are connected. In a way, people should not care too
>>> much not seeing  there service being set to "online", since such check can't
>>> be bullet-proof.
>>
>> It's not about connman functionality at all. It's (as an example)
>> about people building a super secret embedded product demo on top of
>> Yocto suddenly realizing that their device is connecting to a web
>> server they don't control or even know about (aka "who is this Marcel
>> Holtmann why is our IOT Fridge fetching web pages from him?")
>
> if this super secret fridge is connected to the Internet and can actually 
> reach it, then it is no longer super secret. If you would be really worried, 
> then you would have it locked up in a lab with no access to anything.
>
> And even if it would be calling the ConnMan servers, nobody in the world 
> could tell super secret fridge apart from someone sitting next to it using 
> ConnMan on Yocto on a Minnowboard or its laptop.
>
> I can not repeat this enough. This whole think is designed with full 
> anonymity in mind. We are building our own HTTP request for exactly that 
> reason. No headers can sneak in. No unwanted meta data can leak. ConnMan 
> ships its own HTTP client for a reason.

This is a good point, thanks. I don't expect everyone to be persuaded
but I think adding a notice about the online check to Yocto
documentation (mostly that it exists and that it is as anonymous as
possible) should be good enough -- those unhappy about the current
situation always have the option to patch.

 - Jussi


> Think about this for a second. You can leak more information by using a 
> distro libcurl by accident that includes some meta headers. If ConnMan's 
> online check is your concern, then you do not understand privacy at all.
>
>> FWIW, I totally understand the point Patrik makes in the previous discussion:
>>> If the URL is configurable, upstream
>>> does not have the means to fix online related bug reports as we'd be
>>> unable to confirm the online checking service to work properly in the
>>> first place. In the worst case even the URL accessed is not known, not
>>> even to the person submitting the bug report.
>>
>> This is a compelling argument as well -- I'm not in favor of making
>> this too easy. I do think there are legitimate use cases where people
>> do not want to rely on Marcel (or Intel) handling their online checks.
>>
>> Since the required patches are not big (as shown by Pasi, thanks!)
>> just adding clear documentation to Yocto about the online check
>> Connman makes and instructions on how to modify it may be a sufficient
>> alternative.
>
> If someone wants to add documentation on what ConnMan is doing, then I am all 
> for it. More documentation is always good. I am in favor of full transparency.

for what it's worth, I think the connman documentation on this is
fine:I started the subthread because I've had several discussions
where people were negatively surprised that this online check happened
by default -- I think adding transparency within Yocto here is the
key.

> I am however not in favor of giving such an option. If someone wants to shoot 
> themselves into the foot, then they can pick up the gun by themselves. I do 
> not see a good reason why would make this easy.
>
> And honestly I prefer them carrying an extra patch changing the defines in 
> the source code. That means they have to carry that extra patch. So every 
> time it breaks, they get a nice reminder that something might have changed. 
> So they have a change in catching it. The config file is to easy to forget.
>
> Regards
>
> Marcel
>
> _______________________________________________
> connman mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.connman.net/mailman/listinfo/connman
_______________________________________________
connman mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.connman.net/mailman/listinfo/connman

Reply via email to