Re: [qubes-users] Re: Qubes silently ditches Librem

2017-07-13 Thread Noor Christensen 
On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 01:44:24PM +0200, bald...@tutanota.com wrote:
> 
> That's easy to say Andy, but have you any proof? Qubes is an Open
> Source project so why not open up the qubes accounts and let the users
> see some factual information. Surely, there can't be anything to hide?

What would be the point of opening up "the qubes accounts"?

Let's return to your initial questions regarding Librem 13 not getting
certified. Andrew addressed your concerns and explained what happened
with the collaboration process between Librem and Qubes, and why.

Do you have any reason to believe anyone is lying?

It looks to me that neither Qubes or Librem made any promises to anyone,
and that you might have read the *partnership announcement* post as if
the certification was a fact.

They decided to not proceed with the certification, end of story.

-- noor

|_|O|_|
|_|_|O|  Noor Christensen  
|O|O|O|  n...@fripost.org ~ 0x401DA1E0

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"qubes-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to qubes-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to qubes-users@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/qubes-users/20170713150106.axbqd5a77flkxa3b%40mail.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [qubes-users] Re: Qubes silently ditches Librem

2017-07-13 Thread Michael Carbone 
 To summarise. Many months after Purism started taking orders
 for Version 2 of the Librem 13, Qubes formally withdrew its
 certification leaving users in the lurch. In the meantime Qubes
 pocketed $100 per order in commission. This is unforgivable,
 indefensible behavior.
>> 
>> It's worth noting that the commissions the project received were
>> never enough to cover the cost of our developers' time and labor in
>> performing the testing and certification process, but we knew this
>> would be the case going in. This was never about the money; it was
>> about trying to make it easier for Qubes users to find compatible
>> hardware. 
>
> That's easy to say Andy, but have you any proof? Qubes is
> an Open Source project so why not open up the qubes accounts and let
> the users see some factual information. Surely, there can't be
> anything to hide?

Purism doesn't publicly publish the number of laptops it sells?

If you convince them to do so, then multiple the number of
Librem 13 (rev1) that were chosen by the user to have Qubes OS
pre-installed by $100 to get the amount the Qubes project received from
them.

The "lurch" is that new users can no longer order laptops with Qubes
pre-installed and the Qubes project no longer receives a commission for
these laptops. These seem like not good things for the Qubes project --
why would we want this outcome?

Your Librem 13 rev2 will probably work fine with Qubes, feel free to
make a HCL report and share it with the rest of the community, I'm sure
others would appreciate it:

https://www.qubes-os.org/doc/hcl/

-- 
Michael Carbone

Qubes OS | https://www.qubes-os.org
@QubesOS 

PGP fingerprint: D3D8 BEBF ECE8 91AC 46A7 30DE 63FC 4D26 84A7 33B4


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"qubes-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to qubes-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to qubes-users@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/qubes-users/7529916c-9942-a310-cc52-f12487e8092b%40qubes-os.org.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [qubes-users] Re: Qubes silently ditches Librem

2017-07-13 Thread baldric 


That's easy to say Andy, but have you any proof? Qubes is an Open Source 
project so why not open up the qubes accounts and let the users see some 
factual information. Surely, there can't be anything to hide?

--
Securely sent with Tutanota. Claim your encrypted mailbox today!
https://tutanota.com

12. Jul 2017 02:41 by a...@qubes-os.org:


> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
>
> On 2017-07-11 14:36, baldric-q7wo9g+UVklWk0Htik3J/> w...@public.gmane.org>  
> wrote:
>> Chris Laprise:
>>> On 07/10/2017 10:56 AM, Unman wrote:
 This simply isn't true - it's clear from the Purism statement that Librem
 13v2 has not been entered for certification.

 Since Qubes 4 is still at an early stage of development (not even RC1),
 there is little prospect of ANY machine being certified for it at this
 stage.
 The fact that there are issues with Coreboot now is irrelevant - there
 are issues with all sorts of things in 4 as it stands. But it was stated
 that Qubes certified hardware should run on open source boot firmware,
 and I dont think that has changed.

 I dont think that Librem users have been "left in the lurch". It was
 made clear that the Librem13 was not likely to be certified for Qubes 4.
 This doesnt mean that the machine wont work with 4 - if you look at the
 requirements page for 4, minimal are VT-x,VT-d SLAT.
 A quick look at the HCL and the purism site confirms that the 13 has
 CoreI5 6200U, and that CPU does have VT-x, VT-d and SLAT.
 So in what sense does OP have grounds for feeling  "left in the lurch"?

 unman

>>>
>>> And I think its worth re-stating that Qubes wants a formal certification
>>> process (which Purism chose not to continue).
>>>
>>> Qubes should be lauded for creating this process and standing by it; It
>>> guards against the erroneous perceptions people have about "PC hardware"
>>> being a uniform blank canvas for creating an OS.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Sorry guys, I realise you are a couple of die-hard Qubesmen and are
>> desperately trying to defend Qubes reputation, but you need to remove
>> the blinkers and examine the facts.
>>
>> Fact 1/ in my original post I stated "For those of us who followed Qubes
>> hardware recommendations and then bought or ordered shiny new Librem 13
>> laptops, you'll maybe not have noticed that qubes has silently and
>> sneakily withdrawn the recommendation...".  Six months after Purism
>> began taking orders for the version 2 of the Librem 13 and 12 hours
>> after I posted, Andy Wong published an announcement acknowledging that
>> Librem 13v2 was no longer certified by qubes. Now if that doesn't leave
>> people who ordered a version2 Librem13  and just recently had it
>> delivered, in the lurch - I don't know what does.
>>
>
> The announcement didn't actually say (nor would it be accurate to say)
> that the Librem 13v2 was "no longer certified," since it was never
> certified to begin with (see below).
>
>> Fact 2/ In December 15 Qubes trumpeted via its News pages
>> https://www.qubes-os.org/news/2015/12/09/purism-partnership/.Entitled>> ;
>> Partnering with Purism and the first Qubes-certified laptop.
>> Within the document is this statement; "This begins with the
>> certification of the Librem 13" - the words Librem 13 provides a link to
>> https://puri.sm/librem-13>> . Contrary to the arguments you've posted,
>> you'll notice that nowhere within the document does it specify that the
>> certification covers Version 1 of Librem13 only. To the contrary,
>> clicking the link takes you to Version2 of the Librem 13.
>>
>
> At the time of that post, there was no such thing as "v1" or "v2" of the
> Librem 13. It was just "the Librem 13." Only subsequently was a new
> configuration introduced called "Librem 13v2." When the new version was
> introduced, the original configuration was retroactively renamed "Librem
> 13v1," presumably to disambiguate it from the new version.
>
> There's no way we could have known, at the time of that original 2015
> post, that there would end up being two versions of the Librem 13, or
> that the same URL on the Purism website would be used as the product
> page for both versions. Our certification process targets a _specific
> laptop configuration_. Change the configuration, and it's no longer the
> same laptop, at least as far as our certification process is concerned.
> Why? Because what we're certifying is the fact that we've rigorously
> tested that a certain version of Qubes OS is compatible with a certain
> piece of hardware. If you change that piece of hardware or replace it
> with a different one, we can't guarantee that the new piece of hardware
> will be compatible unless we test it.
>
>> To summarise.
>> Many months after Purism started taking orders for Version 2 of the
>> Librem 13, Qubes formally withdrew its certification leaving users in
>> the lurch. In the meantime Qubes pocketed $100 per order in commission.
>> This is

Re: [qubes-users] Re: Qubes silently ditches Librem

2017-07-11 Thread Unman 
On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 07:36:08PM +, 
baldric-q7wo9g+UVklWk0Htik3J/w...@public.gmane.org wrote:
> Chris Laprise:
> > On 07/10/2017 10:56 AM, Unman wrote:
> >> This simply isn't true - it's clear from the Purism statement that Librem
> >> 13v2 has not been entered for certification.
> >>
> >> Since Qubes 4 is still at an early stage of development (not even RC1),
> >> there is little prospect of ANY machine being certified for it at this
> >> stage.
> >> The fact that there are issues with Coreboot now is irrelevant - there
> >> are issues with all sorts of things in 4 as it stands. But it was stated
> >> that Qubes certified hardware should run on open source boot firmware,
> >> and I dont think that has changed.
> >>
> >> I dont think that Librem users have been "left in the lurch". It was
> >> made clear that the Librem13 was not likely to be certified for Qubes 4.
> >> This doesnt mean that the machine wont work with 4 - if you look at the
> >> requirements page for 4, minimal are VT-x,VT-d SLAT.
> >> A quick look at the HCL and the purism site confirms that the 13 has
> >> CoreI5 6200U, and that CPU does have VT-x, VT-d and SLAT.
> >> So in what sense does OP have grounds for feeling  "left in the lurch"?
> >>
> >> unman
> >>
> > 
> > And I think its worth re-stating that Qubes wants a formal certification
> > process (which Purism chose not to continue).
> > 
> > Qubes should be lauded for creating this process and standing by it; It
> > guards against the erroneous perceptions people have about "PC hardware"
> > being a uniform blank canvas for creating an OS.
> > 
> 
> 
> Sorry guys, I realise you are a couple of die-hard Qubesmen and are
> desperately trying to defend Qubes reputation, but you need to remove
> the blinkers and examine the facts.
> 
> Fact 1/ in my original post I stated "For those of us who followed Qubes
> hardware recommendations and then bought or ordered shiny new Librem 13
> laptops, you'll maybe not have noticed that qubes has silently and
> sneakily withdrawn the recommendation...".  Six months after Purism
> began taking orders for the version 2 of the Librem 13 and 12 hours
> after I posted, Andy Wong published an announcement acknowledging that
> Librem 13v2 was no longer certified by qubes. Now if that doesn't leave
> people who ordered a version2 Librem13  and just recently had it
> delivered, in the lurch - I don't know what does.
> 
> Fact 2/ In December 15 Qubes trumpeted via its News pages
> https://www.qubes-os.org/news/2015/12/09/purism-partnership/.Entitled;
> Partnering with Purism and the first Qubes-certified laptop.
> Within the document is this statement; "This begins with the
> certification of the Librem 13" - the words Librem 13 provides a link to
> https://puri.sm/librem-13. Contrary to the arguments you've posted,
> you'll notice that nowhere within the document does it specify that the
> certification covers Version 1 of Librem13 only. To the contrary,
> clicking the link takes you to Version2 of the Librem 13.
> 
> To summarise.
> Many months after Purism started taking orders for Version 2 of the
> Librem 13, Qubes formally withdrew its certification leaving users in
> the lurch. In the meantime Qubes pocketed $100 per order in commission.
> This is unforgivable, indefensible behavior.
> 

"die-hard Qubesman"? I'll take that as a compliment, it's quite catchy.

If I understand your complaint it's that Purism have sold you a laptop
which you thought was certified by Qubes, but isnt. It isnt certified
because Purism changed the specs and decided that they wouldnt submit
this model for certification.

I have no idea what the terms of the agreement were between Purism
and Qubes, nor what monies(if any) changed hands. I doubt that you do,
but perhaps you do.
I dont suppose that anyone considered what would happen if Purism
produced a new laptop with different specs but bearing the same name as
the certified one. At best it seems naive on their part.

If you told Purism you wanted the laptop because its Qubes certified,
you have a claim against them and can get a refund. If you can otherwise
show you were misled your claim is against Purism. I dont know what
jurisdiction you are under but it seems to me a claim of passing off
would succeed.

In any case, you still havent explained in what way you have been left
in the lurch. You have a laptop that seems to be compatible with Qubes
3.  It looks as if it will be compatible with 4, but there was never
any guarantee of that.

Anyway, I have no interest in "defending Qubes reputation"; nor any
interest in Purism. If you have specific problems with using Qubes on
your shiny new Librem 13, I'll try to help. 

cheers

unman

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"qubes-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to qubes-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to

Re: [qubes-users] Re: Qubes silently ditches Librem

2017-07-10 Thread Chris Laprise 

On 07/10/2017 10:56 AM, Unman wrote:

This simply isn't true - it's clear from the Purism statement that Librem
13v2 has not been entered for certification.

Since Qubes 4 is still at an early stage of development (not even RC1),
there is little prospect of ANY machine being certified for it at this
stage.
The fact that there are issues with Coreboot now is irrelevant - there
are issues with all sorts of things in 4 as it stands. But it was stated
that Qubes certified hardware should run on open source boot firmware,
and I dont think that has changed.

I dont think that Librem users have been "left in the lurch". It was
made clear that the Librem13 was not likely to be certified for Qubes 4.
This doesnt mean that the machine wont work with 4 - if you look at the
requirements page for 4, minimal are VT-x,VT-d SLAT.
A quick look at the HCL and the purism site confirms that the 13 has
CoreI5 6200U, and that CPU does have VT-x, VT-d and SLAT.
So in what sense does OP have grounds for feeling  "left in the lurch"?

unman



And I think its worth re-stating that Qubes wants a formal certification 
process (which Purism chose not to continue).


Qubes should be lauded for creating this process and standing by it; It 
guards against the erroneous perceptions people have about "PC hardware" 
being a uniform blank canvas for creating an OS.


--

Chris Laprise, tas...@openmailbox.org
https://twitter.com/ttaskett
PGP: BEE2 20C5 356E 764A 73EB  4AB3 1DC4 D106 F07F 1886

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"qubes-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to qubes-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to qubes-users@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/qubes-users/295976f4-a103-f66a-7526-25dfa56e121d%40openmailbox.org.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [qubes-users] Re: Qubes silently ditches Librem

2017-07-10 Thread Unman 
On Sun, Jul 09, 2017 at 11:01:27AM +, 
qubesos-q7wo9g+UVklWk0Htik3J/w...@public.gmane.org wrote:
> bald...@tutanota.com:
> > For those of us who followed Qubes hardware recommendations and then bought 
> > or ordered shiny new Librem 13 laptops, you'll maybe not have noticed  that 
> > qubes has silently and sneakily withdrawn the recommendation leaving us all 
> > in the lurch.
> > Originally qubes was sold to as all as a reasonably secure OS - that 
> > security they said was built around the trusted ZEN platform. We now know 
> > that Zen has numerous security vulnerabilities
> > How can we trust Qubes judgement anymore? I certainly don't.
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > Securely sent with Tutanota. Claim your encrypted mailbox today!
> > https://tutanota.com
> > 
> 
> Despite the "spin" put out earlier today by Qubes's Andy Wong, the real
> reason Qubes ditched Librem 13, is because the Librem 13 v2 BIOS
> firmware is from Coreboot. Regretably, Qubes 4 will not yet boot
> properly from Coreboot [see github] - hence Librem 13 v2 is useless.

This simply isn't true - it's clear from the Purism statement that Librem
13v2 has not been entered for certification.

Since Qubes 4 is still at an early stage of development (not even RC1),
there is little prospect of ANY machine being certified for it at this
stage.
The fact that there are issues with Coreboot now is irrelevant - there
are issues with all sorts of things in 4 as it stands. But it was stated
that Qubes certified hardware should run on open source boot firmware,
and I dont think that has changed.

I dont think that Librem users have been "left in the lurch". It was
made clear that the Librem13 was not likely to be certified for Qubes 4.
This doesnt mean that the machine wont work with 4 - if you look at the
requirements page for 4, minimal are VT-x,VT-d SLAT.
A quick look at the HCL and the purism site confirms that the 13 has
CoreI5 6200U, and that CPU does have VT-x, VT-d and SLAT.
So in what sense does OP have grounds for feeling  "left in the lurch"? 

unman

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"qubes-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to qubes-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to qubes-users@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/qubes-users/20170710145626.lcuyypfr6mtpo2m4%40thirdeyesecurity.org.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.