[Freedom-misc] Does this mean Librem 15 can be Librebooted?

figosdev at users.sourceforge.net figosdev at users.sourceforge.net
Sat Oct 20 22:46:33 CEST 2018


 > This displays the infatuation some people have about RMS.

no, this is just ad hom. i said what i said about facts not because im in  
love with a person, i said it to make a point. rms was making statements of  
fact, and if any of those facts are demonstrably wrong then people  
criticising him have a point--

so far, none of the factual statements are being refuted. im not asking for  
"proof" here, just evidence that hes wrong-- not vague assertions, which is  
all that was provided against him. now ad hom. can we please have some  
substance?

 > Likely RMS said what he said being misinformed or uninformed.

this is an assertion. all i was asking for was a few details to back it up.  
then we could compare your details with his statement. otherwise, youre only  
saying "hes wrong" and what are we supposed to do with that?

"Then libreboot cannot be right."

this is the same assertion with different wording.

"RMS should have asked libreboot before saying anything about purism."

you are trying to make a point by repeating it three times in a slightly  
different way. would you please tell us why any of the three statements rms  
made were wrong, instead of implying that we are simply biased because of  
personal feelings?

if you say someone is wrong, its reasonable to ask for more information--  
that was the main point that was made in my reponse.

 > You made your own version of
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno's_paradoxes#Achilles_and_the_tortoise

no, i didnt make anything-- i was simply separating his statement into three  
parts and asking you about them individually, to counter your vague (and  
factless, though in the next paragraph you finally answer my request-- the  
point about being infatuated was unnecessary) general assertion.

_

"If you want to install software on the intel cpu it has to be
verified by a key. The key is designed into the cpu. Only
pieces of software which is signed by the private key
will be verified and installed on the cpu. Intel has
the private key. Probably nobody else has it.
You have not said anything wrong, nor has RMS but you
cannot remove the verification key."

now we get to facts, thank you. thats all i was saying before.

you cant remove the key, but as we have talked about in this thread, the chip  
can be fused to run unsigned code. thats what purism is doing-- requesting  
such chips.

"The intel management engine can likely take over the computer
in any way it wants to. Nsa cannot accept such an option on
their computers. According to snowden's papers nsa can
disable the me. Maybe the me is the only backdoor on the
cpus because there are no snowden papers telling about
other cpu backdoors? We do not know."

i completely agree with this.

_

 > this one from february about iommu support and tpm

Explain how is this relevant?
There is no reason to believe a backdoor in the
cpu cannot take control over a qubes
computer.

how it is relevant to the thread? it is a response to the numerous people  
saying nothing has changed since 2014. my reponse to was to point to two more  
recent posts (from the same official blog) that talk about changes in the  
firmware, including reverse engineering of part of the me that is not cleaned  
by me cleaner.

sounds like progress to me-- though im not trying to prove that is, just hand  
the thread part of a requested update.

"Any piece of software on the cpu can contain a back
door. People say not all the cpu software can get
reverse engineered."

i am aware of this. the problem is, that this is true of any modern cpu-- any  
modern cpu can have a backdoor.

until we have cpu chips of our own design (and for that matter, fabrication)  
this is about current best practices, perfection (and trust) are unobtainable  
at this time.

completely 100% unobtainable. we can only address the "known knowns" and the  
"known unknowns" and try to uncover more.

there are exactly 0 chips we can completely trust. since this is a common  
chip, since this thread is not about other chips, my replies are about work  
puri.sm is doing to make progress in this area. i consider that an important  
subject.

and after all, thats the topic of this thread. now, what was your point  
again?



More information about the Freedom-misc mailing list