Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
Deadline scheduling: coming soon?
LWN.net Weekly Edition for November 27, 2013
ACPI for ARM?
LWN.net Weekly Edition for November 21, 2013
GNU virtual private Ethernet
So they thwart that by using using cryptographically signed updates, executables and/or images, not providing easy update mechanisms, etc.
There is still a lot of education needed towards vendors: they will not lose revenue if they open up the device / they might loose revenue if the competitors product is popular for tweaking.
On the other hand most consumers aren't that into tweaking their television - must users don't even change simple color settings to match their environment.
For all Linux devices I've seen with DRM, that is usually well taken care of - unencrypted digital streams are not available to Linux in any way (but remain in co-processors/DSPs/etc).
Threat models for embedded devices
Posted Apr 19, 2010 11:49 UTC (Mon) by Darkmere (subscriber, #53695)
That means, they would be allowed (and okay) to run other software, as long as the "core functionality" can be verified as unmanipulated, simply so we say "you changed it, keep all the pieces" in support.
So yes, we are partially in that same boat, but for a business reason I cannot argue with. Supporting modified binaries would cause a pain. So would it if they were to add too much software and the oom-killer would hit the core software (which can't normally go oom due to careful vetting)
So, what should I do in a situation like this? Soak a support cost, trust customers honesty, or try and prevent my headache?
Posted Apr 19, 2010 21:34 UTC (Mon) by nix (subscriber, #2304)
Posted Jul 4, 2010 22:47 UTC (Sun) by oak (guest, #2786)
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds