[Replicant] OT: Open source GSM board

[Paul van der Vlis]

Op 28-10-16 om 14:27 schreef H. Nikolaus Schaller:
> 
>> Am 28.10.2016 um 13:33 schrieb Paul van der Vlis <paul at vandervlis.nl>:
>>
>> Op 28-10-16 om 12:29 schreef Bob Ham:
>>> On Fri, 2016-10-28 at 11:45 +0200, Paul van der Vlis wrote:
>>>
>>>> Those people
>>>> have working GSM firmware what compiles using GCC, without blobs
>>>
>>> Unfortuantely, that firmware isn't legal to use in most jurisdictions.
>>> The source code came from a leak and carries a proprietary license.  The
>>> people distributing it are violating copyright law.
>>
>> You are right. But phones with Replicant are using a modem with closed
>> source firmware. Both is "bad".
> 
> Why? FSF treats encapsulated firmware in some UART or USB connected modem
> to be "hardware".
> 
>>
>> It's really difficult to create FOSS GSM firmware without examples,
> 
> Why? There are GSM protocol testers, there are text books. There is Osmocomm.
> So a unit test driven software development process seems possible without
> any knowledge about leaked source codes.

Herald Welte from Osmocomm donated 450 USD to get such a board.

>> Michaela is bringing us examples. What Snowden did is very illigal too,
>> but his information is very interesting.
> 
> Of course it is "interesting" to look into the source codes. Like it is
> "interesting" to listen to your private communication...

The second one has privacy issues, the first one not.

> So why should one be "good" (if you are looking into someone else's source
> codes) and the other is "bad" (if someone else, like NSA, is looking
> into your communication)?
> 
> Anyways, there are even two aspects of "legal" in this case.
> 
> One is about the source code license and openness.
> 
> The other is that the frequency bands are not assigned for general purpose,
> but only available to devices which pass a big set of rules. This process
> is called certification. You just have to go through the certification
> process and then it is no longer illegal to use it. You do not need this
> if you operate in a lab and with a dummy load.
> 
> In both cases it is just a matter of efforts and money to contact the
> right people and offer to pay for properly licensed source codes or write
> your own from scratch (there is enough public information available how
> the GSM protocols work). And then go officially through the certification
> process. If you pay you will not be rejected just because you are a small
> project. 

Eventually because it's open source.

> You will be rejected if the device does not conform to the
> certification requirements.
>
> So this is completely different to Snowden's case. He has published information
> that we should know about in a democracy, but where there was no possibility
> to make it legal by enough money or efforts. Hence I think it is a different
> category that leaked source codes.
> 
> Contrary to that, with GSM modems it is just that we (the public community)
> do not collect enough money to fund the legal path - which exists.

If you would collect to get enough money for developing such software
and following the legal path, I would support you too.

With regards,
Paul van der Vlis.


-- 
Paul van der Vlis Linux systeembeheer Groningen
https://www.vandervlis.nl/