Re: OpenWrt One vs. EU Cyber Resilience Act
I did look into the EU CRA from the commercial entity point-of-view. SBOM documentation and continued product monitoring for vulnerabilities and hazards to people are central + effective incident response (including; how to pull a product of the market if needed). In regard to OpenWrt One; it would perhaps be enough if it was/is classified as a not-for-profit device ...? On 19/01/2024 21.18, Hauke Mehrtens wrote: The EU is working on a EU Cyber Resilience Act to improve the software security of (consumer) software and (consumer) hardware which contains software. This should be similar to the CE sign, but for software. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyber_Resilience_Act After the successful lobbying of multiple open source organizations non commercial open source software developer would be exempt from this regulation. As far as I understood the OpenWrt project would not be affected by this regulation, but if a vendor uses OpenWrt on a router, this vendor has to make sure that his product including OpenWrt is compliant when selling onto the EU market. With the OpenWrt One we or Banana Pi could also get required to take care of this regulation. Did someone look into the requirements needed to make OpenWrt compliant to the EU Cyber Resilience Act for a commercial entity? Did someone look into this regulation with the OpenWrt One project in mind? I support the general idea of the EU to improve the security of software. I think the current draft is much better regarding open source than the first versions. Hauke ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel -- - Gregers Baur-Petersen Anthropologist Information security consultant ___ __ | |.-.-.-.| | | |..| |_ | - || _ | -__| || | | || _|| _| |___|| __|_|__|__||||__| || |__| W I R E L E S S F R E E D O M - OpenWrt 19.07.2, r10947-65030d81f3 - ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: OpenWrt One - celebrating 20 years of OpenWrt
On 18/01/2024 17.50, Dave Taht wrote: tee-hee. For the record, I would prefer less (and less buggy) offloads than offloads, and to work on scaling software better to multi-cores. I also would love to find a chip where fq_codel could be offloaded, but with open source for the offload, since the nss drivers are slightly broken... I also would like a pony. Not sure if a pony is the extra addition/feature I need. I'm more of a dog person ;-) On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 11:40 AM Chuanhong Guo wrote: Hi! On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 12:23 AM Fernando Frediani wrote: Hi, interesting. Is it enough to give it the necessary performance boost when doing NAT ? Is it capable of doing it on the chip or does it do on the CPU ? Reading about it seems to be a software thing although seems there are hardware capable devices as well. How comparable is this to a chip that has NAT offload capability ? MT7981 is such a chip with NAT offload capability, and the flow-offload driver mentioned in other threads is actually a driver for this hardware block. Since it's a cost-down MT7986 I would imagine this particular feature is the same between them: HW NAT − Etherent/WiFi − Wired speed − IPv4 routing, NAT, NAPT − IPv6 routing, DS-Lite, 6RD -- Regards, Chuanhong Guo ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel -- - Gregers Baur-Petersen Anthropologist - ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
