GrapheneOS (@[email protected])
grapheneos.social
@[email protected] They want you to use an OS which doesn't provide firmware updates and therefore doesn't protect you from serious known vulnerabilities. The firmware is still present when using an OS not updating it. Pretending as if the hardware and firmware isn't closed source by not updating the firmware simply harms users. They're a group known for having nonsensical, inconsistent beliefs and spreading misinformation/spin to promote them. Stop getting info from charlatans.

They say that GNU is spreading misinformation and “stop getting info from charlatans”?

  • exu@feditown.comEnglish
    91·
    2 months ago

    Unfortunately, the FSF isn’t against firmware blobs, only against those updatable by a user.

    From their Respects Your Freedom requirements page.

    However, there is one exception for secondary embedded processors. The exception applies to software delivered inside auxiliary and low-level processors and FPGAs, within which software installation is not intended after the user obtains the product. This can include, for instance, microcode inside a processor, firmware built into an I/O device, or the gate pattern of an FPGA. The software in such secondary processors does not count as product software.

    This means that proprietary firmware flashed at the factory and impossible to replace gets a pass, while hardware with firmware updates through blobs is rejected. Important security fixes (CPU microcode) or stability improvements will be missing if you can’t update the firmware.

      • exu@feditown.comEnglish
        6·
        2 months ago

        Sure and that’s the ideal, but as it currently stands the FSF would rank hardware like this:

        1. Fully open source
        2. Proprietary flashed in factory and impossible to replace
        3. Proprietary and can be updated/replaced

        This makes no sense for security, stability or ideological reasons.