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”?

  • krolden@lemmy.ml
    0·
    3 months ago

    Except they also advocate using compute devices that only use blobless firmware

    • exu@feditown.comEnglish
      0·
      3 months ago

      Yeah, the FSF stance on firmware is really weird.

      Basically, if the firmware is not intended to be updated it’s fine. But distributing updates, like security fixes, for firmware as blobs is somehow bad.

      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.

      https://ryf.fsf.org/about/criteria

      Here’s an article from the previous time (?) this topic came up.

      https://ariadne.space/2022/01/22/the-fsfs-relationship-with-firmware-is-harmful-to-free-software-users/

    • ramenu@lemmy.mlEnglish
      0·
      3 months ago

      I know. And that’s reasonable of course. I’m sure most of us would agree that proprietary blobs are bad. I’m optimistic that firmware will become more open in the future though.