Bill Crawford wrote: > 2008/6/18 Andrew Haley <aph@xxxxxxxxxx>: > > >> 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. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
