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

Fri Sep 4 13:28:18 CDT 2015

Well, they do have a responsibility to their stockholders, er, it's
stockholder, Rocco B. Commisso

On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Scott Yates <Scott at yatesframe.com> wrote:

> All cable modems have a back door for "configuration" purposes.  As I
> understand it, they all basically wake up and ask for configuration
> information (over tftp still I think) from the upstream system.  The main
> issue was that my modem was the same model# as the ones they rent.
>
> And yes, it HAD crossed my mind to move it further up, but they corrected
> the issue, and in this case I think it was an honest mistake.
>
> Now the whole remove features and charge to put them back thing on the
> other hand!
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 1:08 PM, jim kraai <jimgkraai at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > That's pretty interesting.
> >
> > Just an earful?  No call to the AG about their malicious hacking (and
> > hijacking etc.) of your personal property?
> >
> > So ... how'd they get into your router?  Was there a backdoor or did you
> > leave the default password or cable-guy home invasion or what?
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 1:01 PM, Scott Yates <Scott at yatesframe.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Mediacom downgraded the firmware on the Cisco wireless routers they
> use,
> > > and locked their customers out of wifi.  They then turned around and
> > > decided to charge customers monthly to allow them to use wifi.
> Complete
> > > and total asshat move.
> > >
> > > What made matters even MORE annoying is that they did the same thing to
> > the
> > > router I OWNED.  They got an ear-full over that stunt.
> > >
> > > After they corrected their mistake on my personal router, I was still
> > > annoyed (once bitten and all that) so I went and got a Motorola dumb
> > modem
> > > and bridged it into a pfsense machine for all my routing.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 9:58 AM, jim kraai <jimgkraai at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > 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
> > > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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
>