[Cialug] FCC to Make DD-WRT on 5GHz Wireless Routers Illegal?

[jim kraai]

unfamiliar w/ the mediacom's whole home wireless.


On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 9:18 AM, Barry Von Ahsen <vonahsen at gmail.com> wrote:

> you mean like mediacom's whole home wireless?
>
>
> -barry
>
>
>
> > On Sep 4, 2015, at 6:35 AM, jim kraai <jimgkraai at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Maybe the companies sees what the auto and heavy equipment industries are
> > doing and recognized a chance to turn a one-time router purchase into a
> > long-term router subscription and asked people in the FCC to create these
> > rules for that purpose.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 8:14 AM, Matt <matt at itwannabe.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Of course the FCC isn't TRYING to ban DD-WRT, OpenWRT, or other open
> >> source firmwares.  They just don't understand that it is a trillion
> times
> >> easier for a company to sign the whole firmware with a 4096-bit private
> key
> >> than it is to separate the chunk of code that runs the radios and only
> sign
> >> it.  It's also cheaper for the company to utilize SDRs than it is to
> >> develop and ASIC with the functionality of the radios baked in, and
> even if
> >> it wasn't that would prevent the company from ever upgrading the radios
> >> should a bug of some sort be found after production began.
> >>
> >> What will end up happening is the FCC will put out some
> >> poorly/loosely-worded regulation that the industry will panic about, and
> >> everything from the router firmware all the way down to the flashing of
> the
> >> wifi activity LED will be buried under ninety tons of DRM/encryption.
> >> Everyone who wants a guest network or any other neat feature from their
> >> next router will end up having to either buy a $350 top of the line
> router,
> >> get a new/used/refurbished enterprise (Cisco, anyone?) router, or build
> a
> >> custom router using an old PC and a WiFi card just to get that one
> feature
> >> they need.  All this while everyone else ends up having to go back to
> their
> >> crappy original firmware with a terrible feature set, clunky web
> interface,
> >> and awful network monitoring capabilities (if any at all) when they
> decide
> >> to upgrade.
> >>
> >> -- Matt (N0BOX)
> >>
> >>
> >> On 9/3/2015 11:21 PM, Scott Yates wrote:
> >>
> >>> Not so much maybe:
> >>>
> >>>
> https://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20150831/07164532118/no-fcc-is-not-intentionally-trying-to-kill-third-party-wi-fi-router-firmware.shtml
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 10:19 PM, jim kraai <jimgkraai at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> What?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> http://hackaday.com/2015/09/02/save-wifi-act-now-to-save-wifi-from-the-fcc/
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Cialug mailing list
> >>>> Cialug at cialug.org
> >>>> http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Cialug mailing list
> >>> Cialug at cialug.org
> >>> http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug
> >>>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Cialug mailing list
> >> Cialug at cialug.org
> >> http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Cialug mailing list
> > Cialug at cialug.org
> > http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cialug mailing list
> Cialug at cialug.org
> http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug
>