Bill Crawford wrote:
2008/6/18 Andrew Haley <aph(a)redhat.com>:
> Really? We don't need this firmware? Are you sure about that?
We do need it, which was what I was getting at :o)
Sure, but my argument was not about firmware that we need, it was
about firmware that we don't need.
this fuss is ...
well, shipping replacements for those firmwares is IMO subtly
different to shipping a binary driver to run on the cpu. There *is* an
argument that for perfect security (or at least peace of mind) we
should consider these a potential source of danger (bugs in firmware
might mean random DMA-ing of your crypto keys into a network packet,
etc etc but the real risk is likely zero).
>> Yes. Which is why we should stop supporting these
"PCs" which aren't
>> completely free.
> I don't understand what you're saying here. Are you saying that we
> should stop supporting any PC that contains any firmware that isn't
> free? That seems rather extreme.
I was joking :o)
But this is a complete non sequitur as a reply to my argument,
which was about *unnecessary* firmware updates. I can understand
why you say this, but I can't understand why you think it is an
appropriate reply to what _I_ said.
If we're content with on-board firmware, what's the harm in
shipping
replacement firmware to put on those devices when we boot? *shrug*
Well, consider the alternative: every time a hardware manufacturer
throws a random binary over the wall and asks us to put it into
our kernel, we salute and say "Yes, sir!"
Andrew.