Op 28-10-16 om 14:27 schreef H. Nikolaus Schaller: > >> Am 28.10.2016 um 13:33 schrieb Paul van der Vlis <p...@vandervlis.nl>: >> >> Op 28-10-16 om 12:29 schreef Bob Ham: >>> On Fri, 2016-10-28 at 11:45 +0200, Paul van der Vlis wrote: >>> >>>> Those people >>>> have working GSM firmware what compiles using GCC, without blobs >>> >>> Unfortuantely, that firmware isn't legal to use in most jurisdictions. >>> The source code came from a leak and carries a proprietary license. The >>> people distributing it are violating copyright law. >> >> You are right. But phones with Replicant are using a modem with closed >> source firmware. Both is "bad". > > Why? FSF treats encapsulated firmware in some UART or USB connected modem > to be "hardware". > >> >> It's really difficult to create FOSS GSM firmware without examples, > > Why? There are GSM protocol testers, there are text books. There is Osmocomm. > So a unit test driven software development process seems possible without > any knowledge about leaked source codes.
Herald Welte from Osmocomm donated 450 USD to get such a board. >> Michaela is bringing us examples. What Snowden did is very illigal too, >> but his information is very interesting. > > Of course it is "interesting" to look into the source codes. Like it is > "interesting" to listen to your private communication... The second one has privacy issues, the first one not. > So why should one be "good" (if you are looking into someone else's source > codes) and the other is "bad" (if someone else, like NSA, is looking > into your communication)? > > Anyways, there are even two aspects of "legal" in this case. > > One is about the source code license and openness. > > The other is that the frequency bands are not assigned for general purpose, > but only available to devices which pass a big set of rules. This process > is called certification. You just have to go through the certification > process and then it is no longer illegal to use it. You do not need this > if you operate in a lab and with a dummy load. > > In both cases it is just a matter of efforts and money to contact the > right people and offer to pay for properly licensed source codes or write > your own from scratch (there is enough public information available how > the GSM protocols work). And then go officially through the certification > process. If you pay you will not be rejected just because you are a small > project. Eventually because it's open source. > You will be rejected if the device does not conform to the > certification requirements. > > So this is completely different to Snowden's case. He has published > information > that we should know about in a democracy, but where there was no possibility > to make it legal by enough money or efforts. Hence I think it is a different > category that leaked source codes. > > Contrary to that, with GSM modems it is just that we (the public community) > do not collect enough money to fund the legal path - which exists. If you would collect to get enough money for developing such software and following the legal path, I would support you too. With regards, Paul van der Vlis. -- Paul van der Vlis Linux systeembeheer Groningen https://www.vandervlis.nl/ _______________________________________________ Replicant mailing list Replicant@lists.osuosl.org http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant
