Re: [LinuxBIOS] [RFC] Call for Action: LinuxBIOS foundations

[Robert Vogel]

Very Strange.

I didn't write the note attributed to me (below). It's not clear where it 
came from.

I'll comment on it though: It LinusBIOS is licensed under GPLv3, it is my 
understanding that there are good protections against Tivoization.
Also if the code is fully disclosed I think that there is considerably less 
possibility of treachery. That's why I think it could be better at home.

The question that I asked...which I'm stilling searching for an answer:

If there are one million computers running LinuxBios, are they dedicated to
server farms ?

...or can they be used as desktop machines ? Looking at 
http://linuxbios.org/Products most vendors are
 configuring clusters and it is not clear if anyone offers a desktop 
machine. The FSF says that it is working on one.

Are there any vendors that will attempt a desktop machine with LinuxBios ?

Bob

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Robert Millan" 
To: "Robert Vogel" 
Cc: "Stefan Reinauer" ; ; 

Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 11:37 AM
Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] [RFC] Call for Action: LinuxBIOS foundations
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 09:39:10AM -0400, Robert Vogel wrote:
> > > > Maybe this is sligtly off topic here (and a little bit paranoid..), 
> > > > but
> > > > when one
> > > > consider the fact that "trusted computing" becomes more and more
> > > > prevalent in
> > > > new systems (mandatory soon maybe?!), doesn't this outright kill the 
> > > > LB
> > > > project?
> > >
> > > The opposite is the case. LinuxBIOS is the _only_ chance out there that
> > > allows controlling the restrictions. It does not restrict the vendor in
> > > controlling the "bootblock" -- Since there is no such thing as the
> > > bootblock in LinuxBIOSv2, I wonder what the technical meaning of that
> > > part of the specification is supposed to be.
>
> I don't mean to start a flame but, uhm well I'll have to take the risk :-)
>
> Have you considered the possiblity that LinuxBIOS is used for Tivoization?
>
> <GPLv2> I know my rights; I want my phone call!
> <DRM> What use is a phone call, if you are unable to speak?
> (as seen on /.)

[LinuxBIOS] [RFC] Call for Action: LinuxBIOS foundations

[Corey Osgood]

Robert Vogel wrote:
> Very Strange.
>
> I didn't write the note attributed to me (below). It's not clear where it 
> came from.

Heh, such are mailing lists.
> I'll comment on it though: It LinusBIOS is licensed under GPLv3, it is my 
> understanding that there are good protections against Tivoization.
> Also if the code is fully disclosed I think that there is considerably less 
> possibility of treachery. That's why I think it could be better at home.

Some of LinuxBIOS is "GPLv2", but most is "GPLv2 or later". But I don't 
really see why there's a concern about Tivoization, perhaps I'm just 
ignorant of how it could be implemented.
> The question that I asked...which I'm stilling searching for an answer:
>
> If there are one million computers running LinuxBios, are they dedicated to
> server farms ?
>
> ...or can they be used as desktop machines ? Looking at 
> http://linuxbios.org/Products most vendors are
>  configuring clusters and it is not clear if anyone offers a desktop 
> machine. The FSF says that it is working on one.
>
> Are there any vendors that will attempt a desktop machine with LinuxBios ?
>
> Bob

LinuxBIOS also runs on many embedded boards, for example the Linutop 
(linutop.com) and OLPC "XO" laptop (laptop.org). There are also some 
supported desktop boards, see the "Supported Mainboards" wiki page. 
Here's where most of the 1 million comes from though: 
http://linuxbios.org/News#2005.2F04.2F22_How_Many_People_Are_Using_LinuxBIOS...

-Corey

[LinuxBIOS] [RFC] Call for Action: LinuxBIOS foundations

[Joseph Smith]

Quoting Corey Osgood :
> But I don't really see why there's a concern about Tivoization,  
> perhaps I'm just ignorant of how it could be implemented.

Yeh, maybe I'm ignorant also?? What do you mean by Tivoization??  
LinuxBios on set-top-boxes?? Hardware hacking?? Fill me in....

Thanks - Joe

[LinuxBIOS] [RFC] Call for Action: LinuxBIOS foundations

[Rasmus Wiman]

Joseph Smith  wrote:
> Yeh, maybe I'm ignorant also?? What do you mean by Tivoization??  
> LinuxBios on set-top-boxes?? Hardware hacking?? Fill me in....

"Here's the source code for the stuff in your tivo. Feel free to
recompile it. Oh, by the way, the tivo will checksum the binary, so if
one single bit differs from the stock software, you won't be able to
install it in the tivo".

/Rasmus

[LinuxBIOS] [RFC] Call for Action: LinuxBIOS foundations

[Joseph Smith]

Quoting Rasmus Wiman :
> Joseph Smith  wrote:
> > Yeh, maybe I'm ignorant also?? What do you mean by Tivoization??
> > LinuxBios on set-top-boxes?? Hardware hacking?? Fill me in....
>
> "Here's the source code for the stuff in your tivo. Feel free to
> recompile it. Oh, by the way, the tivo will checksum the binary, so if
> one single bit differs from the stock software, you won't be able to
> install it in the tivo".
>
> /Rasmus

Oh, ok. I hate people/companies that suppress the open source  
concept. If your going to post the source code and it is not open  
source you might as well change you name to Micro####, if you know  
what I mean.

So instead one could just develop a new bios so he/she would not have  
to deal with that checksum bs and be able to install their OS of choice.

Thanks - Joe

[LinuxBIOS] [RFC] Call for Action: LinuxBIOS foundations

[Joseph Smith]

Tivoization

Sorry about that last post... I get a little worked up sometimes.

Thanks - Joe

[LinuxBIOS] [RFC] Call for Action: LinuxBIOS foundations

[Corey Osgood]

Joseph Smith wrote:
> Quoting Corey Osgood :
> > But I don't really see why there's a concern about Tivoization,  
> > perhaps I'm just ignorant of how it could be implemented.
>
> Yeh, maybe I'm ignorant also?? What do you mean by Tivoization??  
> LinuxBios on set-top-boxes?? Hardware hacking?? Fill me in....
>
> Thanks - Joe

Open source software on hardware that requires a certain digital 
signature in software, so that it won't run if the software has been 
modified. I suppose linuxbios could be used for tivoization of the 
payload, perhaps easier than a normal bios, but in that case couldn't 
linuxbios just be rebuilt to not include the signature checks?

-Corey

[LinuxBIOS] [RFC] Call for Action: LinuxBIOS foundations

[Peter Stuge]

On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 05:16:31PM -0500, Corey Osgood wrote:
> I suppose linuxbios could be used for tivoization of the payload,
> perhaps easier than a normal bios, but in that case couldn't 
> linuxbios just be rebuilt to not include the signature checks?

Certainly!

//Peter

[LinuxBIOS] [RFC] Call for Action: LinuxBIOS foundations

[Uwe Hermann]

On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 11:32:31PM +0200, Peter Stuge wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 05:16:31PM -0500, Corey Osgood wrote:
> > I suppose linuxbios could be used for tivoization of the payload,
> > perhaps easier than a normal bios, but in that case couldn't 
> > linuxbios just be rebuilt to not include the signature checks?
>
> Certainly!

If the check is done in LinuxBIOS, yes. If some hardware component or
other piece of software does the check _before_ LinuxBIOS takes over
you're screwed (I can't easily imagine a way to do that, though).

Uwe.

[LinuxBIOS] [RFC] Call for Action: LinuxBIOS foundations

[matt]

> Yeh, maybe I'm ignorant also?? What do you mean by Tivoization??  
> LinuxBios on set-top-boxes?? Hardware hacking?? Fill me in....

google 'wiki tivoization' comes up with i good explanation of it.  i
had to to this my self when reading the email :)