Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Coreboot Developer: Purism Doesn't Deliver On Libre Firmware

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Coreboot Developer: Purism Doesn't Deliver On Libre Firmware

    Phoronix: Coreboot Developer: Purism Doesn't Deliver On Libre Firmware

    A Coreboot developer has confirmed fears over Purism Librem laptops not really being free nor really bringing much to the table compared to other Linux laptop vendors...

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite

  • #2
    meh, there's these things called baby steps, and we must first learn to walk before we can run. Librem might not be a "pure" laptop but if it really is going to run coreboot it does offer something over other laptop vendors and is a step in the right direction, and quite frankly GluGlug is an utter joke.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
      meh, there's these things called baby steps, and we must first learn to walk before we can run. Librem might not be a "pure" laptop but if it really is going to run coreboot it does offer something over other laptop vendors and is a step in the right direction, and quite frankly GluGlug is an utter joke.
      Chromebooks run coreboot, and high end Chromebooks do exist.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by peppercats View Post
        Chromebooks run coreboot, and high end Chromebooks do exist.
        Except as I understand it, they require magic binary blobs inside the coreboot. I think AMD might have more open coreboot for some platforms, but not really sure, or even to what extent it's open.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by maligor View Post
          Except as I understand it, they require magic binary blobs inside the coreboot. I think AMD might have more open coreboot for some platforms, but not really sure, or even to what extent it's open.
          Personally I don't find platform specific blobs a huge problem as long as...

          A: They're generic and not tied to a particular operating system (or boot firmware, as the case may be)
          B: They're well written and not hiding bugs and security problems
          C: Nothing major (feature wise) could be gained by an open rewrite
          D: The code doesn't have much value outside that platform (ie, an open source implementation couldn't be widely useful)

          Of course all things equal, open code is always better (code review, easy enhancements/fixes, etc), but the hard fact is there's only so much code writing manpower out there and if effort could be better spent somewhere else, why reinvent the wheel purely for idealism?

          That said, there are some rather insidious things that can be done in these hidden chunks of code, and that's my main worry. Don't need keyloggers or backdoors running in the chipset or SMM or what have you. A comforting thought here though, is that if these things were present and being used, they would probably be discovered quickly. That would be enough to have a manufacturer or intelligence agency think twice about using such a thing at an inappropriate scale (ignoring whether any such use could be considered appropriate).

          But at the end of the day, if it's a "well, they could have just put it in mask rom" and the only thing getting people angry is that it's flashable or loaded to RAM, ehh... I think there's more important worries out there.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by maligor View Post
            Except as I understand it, they require magic binary blobs inside the coreboot. I think AMD might have more open coreboot for some platforms, but not really sure, or even to what extent it's open.
            John Lewis makes vanilla Coreboot images available for a wide number of Chromebooks.

            Here is a good walk-through of installing one of these vanilla Coreboot images on an Acer C720 Chromebook.

            Comment


            • #7
              What makes you think that those backdoors can be even detected? Don't remember exactly where I was reading this recently, maybe HN or Ars but NSA can alter Cisco routers in a way that cannot be detected...

              Originally posted by BradN View Post
              That said, there are some rather insidious things that can be done in these hidden chunks of code, and that's my main worry. Don't need keyloggers or backdoors running in the chipset or SMM or what have you. A comforting thought here though, is that if these things were present and being used, they would probably be discovered quickly. That would be enough to have a manufacturer or intelligence agency think twice about using such a thing at an inappropriate scale (ignoring whether any such use could be considered appropriate).

              But at the end of the day, if it's a "well, they could have just put it in mask rom" and the only thing getting people angry is that it's flashable or loaded to RAM, ehh... I think there's more important worries out there.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by maligor View Post
                Except as I understand it, [Chromebooks] require magic binary blobs inside the coreboot.
                Yes, exactly the same binaries that Librem will require. In fact, those binaries mostly exist due to Chromebooks (ie. a compromise with Intel to make coreboot on these Intel chipsets possible), while Librem merely piggybacks on that effort.

                So, what is Purism bringing to the table again?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by pgeorgi View Post
                  Yes, exactly the same binaries that Librem will require. In fact, those binaries mostly exist due to Chromebooks (ie. a compromise with Intel to make coreboot on these Intel chipsets possible), while Librem merely piggybacks on that effort.

                  So, what is Purism bringing to the table again?
                  Here's info on the Chromebook binary blobs from John Lewis's website:

                  Q. Is coreboot *completely* open?

                  No, in the case of Intel chipsets, there are at least 2 binaries blobs required ? the system agent and management engine binaries. Without the first, the system will not boot at all. Without the second your Chromebook will auto switch-off after 30 mins. The vast majority of coreboot compatible Intel hardware also requires a VGA blob.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by pgeorgi View Post
                    Yes, exactly the same binaries that Librem will require. In fact, those binaries mostly exist due to Chromebooks (ie. a compromise with Intel to make coreboot on these Intel chipsets possible), while Librem merely piggybacks on that effort.

                    So, what is Purism bringing to the table again?
                    Oh I dunno... maybe a higher end laptop with desktop linux as opposed to ChromeOS by default + coreboot.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X