Slashdot Mirror
Hifn Restricts Crypto Docs, OpenBSD Opens Fire
Mhrmnhrm writes "After totally closing off public access to documentation for their chips roughly five years ago, Hifn is again offering them, but with an invasive registration requirement. Needless to say, Theo de Raadt and the rest of the OpenBSD team were not amused, and following a Hifn manager's missive, the gauntlet has been thrown. Either open the docs fully, or be removed from the system. This wouldn't be the first time... the same thing happened to both Adaptec and Intel following similar spats."
...I count 12 required fields where you have to enter data.
Is this worth throwing a hissy fit over? Once one person downloads the docs, they can distribute them.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
Oi, Theo! I agree with you 100%, but please, tone down the virtiol just a smidge! From TFA:
Calling their products "crummy" and threatening them with driver deletion if they don't stop "baiting" you is not a way to get what you want. Now it means some egomaniacal manager has to eat crow for the driver to go public. I was in 100% agreement with your post until I got to this point.
Sometimes, I wish someone would just slip some sort of tranquilizer in the water supply near Alberta...
That's a typical OpenBSD discussion, in which Theo DeRaadt
i) is basically right
ii) still manages to sound like spoiled whiny tosser in the process.
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
With a choice between "make Theo happy" and "violate export regulations" it doesn't seem like Hifn is exactly trying to "bait" Theo or OpenBSD.
If he objects to providing that information, he can say so, but this sort of easily-refuted hyperbole doesn't help.
While I whole-heartedly agree with the point Theo was making in his article, I can't help but think that engaging in hyperbole (50 questions? ~25 is accurate) and verbally abusing and threatening the vendor is going to help in any way.
You know what, if you'd wanted this 15 years ago, you would have phoned them up, given them the EXACT SAME INFO THEY'RE ASKING FOR on their web site, and they would have mailed it to you.
And a sales-person might have called to see if you wanted to buy some chips.
Theo's "50 questions" is email, name, company name, title, address, phone number, and "what is your project? What is your role? When do you want to buy some chips?" How about a little reality here. Theo does some great stuff, but that doesn't mean he gets to bend how the world works to his will.
Just like the "I don't get any donations" rant from him a bit ago, he just doesn't seem to be well grounded in business realities. If you want donations, you need a tax-exempt foundation, not "make checks out to Theo." If you want data sheets, you might have to tell the company who you are and why you want them.
The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
When companies impose weird intellectual property restrictions on their data sheets, then I'm all for making the process of getting the data sheets as cumbersome as possible--that way, FOSS developers will at least become aware that there is something funny going on.
Some other vendors hide a restrictive license ("if you look at this, we own stuff you do with it") somewhere in the documentation or behind a "Read This License" link, but people who look at the documentation never notice.
OpenBSD could really care less about Hifn in the long run. Someone stated that Theo thinks his personal information is like currency. It is. The US government would love nothing more than to learn who uses crypto devices and they have no right to that information. Thankfully, OpenBSD is based in Canada and not in the US. The US has long been opposed to crypto among the masses but cannot really do anything about it. This president is doing his damndest to crack down on anyone and anything that even remotely smacks of anti-US sentiment, policy, etc.
OpenBSD should delete the driver and move on. It would not take that much capital to devise you own crypto chip sets, write the drivers and then have the Chinese or Koreans build them for you. OpenBSD could sell the chips and the drivers and fund itself in the process.
Go OpenBSD!
Unless Theo can give a decent estimate of how much 'sales' OpenBSD has 'given' them, I doubt the upper brass at Hifn cares about Theo's whinging.
I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of their customers were BSD users. It's quite a common OS in the sort of application this chip is designed for.
If you don't believe me, we'll, the only reason NVIDIA's Linux support is miles ahead of ATI is due to the demand from Hollywood setups to use high-end-5000%-margin professional cards on Linux, not geeks on Slashdot playing Tuxracer.
PowerVR released a linux driver for the Kyro 2. The only people who would have had any interest in that were the geeks playing TuxRacer.
What makes you think the Linux geek market is so small? A lot of Linux nerds are early adopters, and are quite likely to choose one high end graphics card over another simply because it will run on their Linux partition. Half a million slashdot readers may not be the bulk of their market, but it's probably worth something.
Well, it would appear that a condition of obtaining an export licence for their products is that they be able to identify their customers.
This is entirely beside the point. The driver writers are not customers.
Documentation of a product is not restricted by export licenses pertaining to that product...only the product itself is restricted.
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
Theo isn't asking for a product. He is asking for documentation (data sheets). Further, as the email points out, he isn't looking for documentation regarding unreleased products, etc. but for documentation that was *freely* available eight years ago. Additionally he points out that other *crypto* companies provide information that is more available. What is unclear to me though is whether or not those companies he vaguely mentions are US companies.
I have signed up, the confirmation arrived within seconds and on the welcome is a message it may take several hours for a sysadmin to allow access - but no, I'm downloading PDF's straight away so it must be automated.
It's just marketing; but Theo is right about that not being completely free, as in free speech.
The article mentions "liberalisation", it seems that they're leaning to the left, but they're not actually left in their ideas and business model. Dump the driver.
This tagline was transcoded to result in at least one smirk. If you experience failure to smirk, please consult your Gen
Everybody seems to be sidestepping the main issue.
The real question that should be answered is whether hifn are indeed required by law to ask personal information of the people downloading documentation, as hifn claims they are.
If they are, than hifn simply cannot comply with OpenBSD's demands without breaking U.S. law.
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
Such kernels developers feedback are very precious and insightful for us, customers. It's not only a matter of freedom an principles, it's about quality.
Be sure that - whatever the OS you use, being Linux, OpenBSD or FreeBSD -, when a vendor behaves that bad and is so reluctant in providing open access to documentation, you won't have a good driver nor a good support.
Those vendors behaviours are usually symptoms of a "closed" attitude, secrecy centerd, so even when we accept NDA, we can't expect them to disclose the whole needed informations (like, say, all firmwares versions bugs that needs a workaround in drivers level, know bad behaviour of their chipsets etc). This attitude will also discourage some knowledgeable developers to help to improve the driver, to fix bugs etc. Requiring NDA will prevent OSS kernel developers to share sensitive informations regarding their experience with the device (between OS, and even sometime inside the same kernel dev team).
So for now, if you need a stable encryption accelerator device, consider choosing an other vendor. Look out for Via C3, or SafeNet (and even some Broadcom) chipsets: those vendors plays the game well, don't seat on their customers (we) and the developers needs. They don't even hide behind a "U.S. export laws restrictions" argument, and didn't faced trials, proving the hypocrisy of HiFn assertions.
Just give bogus information.
Everybody does!
in a form that will be made public. They need a PR person.
He is right in principal in many cases, however he has absolutely no talent when it comes to voicing that principal. OpenBSD seriously need a PR person that knows how to deal with actual people, you know with a hint of tact, cause he doesnt have any whatsoever.
The phrase "more better" is acceptable English. suck it grammar Nazis
Fair enough, Hank. But I reserve the right to not use proprietary crypto code in sensitive applications - which are the only ones that I'd actually buy hardware acceleration for in the first place.
Let's get this straight: there's a world of difference between closed video card drivers and closed crypto drivers. Many of us are squeamish about about the former, so why would you think we'd cheerfully accept the latter? A closed source video driver could potentially crash my non-networked game machine. A closed source encryption accelerator cold potentially open my VPN server to the whole world.
I hope you can appreciate the community's position here, but whether you agree with it or not is immaterial. Should you change your opinion to better mesh with that of your would-be customers, please let us know. Many of us would like to buy your products if they become usable for our applications.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
If I have the choice, I run OpenBSD on servers because when it fits, it fits like a glove. If Theo acts like everyone else and just rolls over when a suit tells him no, OpenBSD would be just like every other Linux/BSD distro. This sort of attention to details (in both software and licenses) makes OpenBSD distictive. In marketing-speak, this is called 'developing a niche'. Within its niche, OpenBSD has no equal. If it looses its niche, then it will loose its market share. So I think the best thing Theo can do is to be Theo.
Think global, act loco
While I agree his language may not make friends, it's his system, his drivers, his sweat., if he wants to call a bunch of weasels with crap products weasels with crap products, who are we to judge?
I say to Theo: "kick **more** ass"
and to hell with detractors, most of whom surely have never installed OpenBSD, let alone taken the extra step to purchase it.
Context is everything in this sort of thing.
You missed one IMPORTANT detail in this- the documentation to drive the chip is NOT covered under Export Regulations.
Only the drivers their OEMS bundle WITH the cards, any technical documentation talking to algos, AND the chip itself
are covered by Export Regulations. They don't have a need to restrict the SDK info for that reason.
Once you understand that, this becomes more of a businessman trying to "protect" purported IP type thing.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Here's the crucial difference. The plans for the W80 nuclear warhead are classified information. The source code for PGP is not. Now, it may be encumbered by things such as copyright or intellectual property rights, but that doesn't stop the rights holder from using those rights. Likewise, the crypto boards themselves may be considered munitions, but the documentation describing the capabilities and interfaces are intellectual property covered by copyright at best.
Bryan J. Casto
bryan.casto(a)gmail.com
No, he doesn't. /. readers probably have so little practice speaking truth to power that they don't recognize what it looks like when it's laid out before them. The only non-surprise here is that another /. poster is finding a way to criticize those who defend our freedom to share and modify by speaking up and acting out. It's much like the overrated comments on the recent RMS in France thread where RMS was denied an audience with Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin; some posters in that thread chose to focus on RMS' dress, even implicltly supporting RMS' lack of a suit as a valid reason for dismissal rather than point out far more salient (possibly financial) relationships between de Villepin and Bill Gates (or other heads of state who do business with Microsoft and Bill Gates). de Raadt's strident message in this OpenBSD thread is on-topic, on-target, clearly written, precise, and perfectly appropriate. We need more such language in the pursuit of software freedom. I would have hoped that /. readers, being overwhelmingly computer users who probably receive very little respect in their own work regardless of how they dress, would be more inclined to weigh someone's message, not their appearance.
Digital Citizen
Do you honestly believe personal achievement gives a person license to be petty and immature, or are you just baiting me?
I'm not baiting you. I'm just stating that if someone does more than the average person is willing or able to do he can go crow about it a bit.
As in... If a scientist cured AIDs or cancer tomorrow, he can kick a puppy or two and we should be able to look past that.
This is of course relative to your position on absolute and relative morality, but if someone does something for me out of his own free will and effor (and it benefits me greatly), he can be as a big of an immature ass as he wants and I'll gladly ignore it and enjoy his product.
However, if you haven't done anything to improve our well being and just complain about others being improper and immature brats... I'm sort of hard pressed to agree with you if that immature brat has done work that has helped many of us as a whole.
Personally, I would like mature, polite, and altruistic people making software for me (and does it out of the kindness of their heart and not a bullshit sales talk to take my money) over an immature one, but sometimes we have to deal with the fact those people don't exist as often as we would like...
I'd like to be proven wrong because that would we live in a better world than I think we do.
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
Well, we all have our limits. Some people worry, and justifiably so, that their BIOS isn't open. I'm somewhere in the middle in that I use the proprietary NVidia drivers, even though I don't like it. I'd think that everyone, though, would agree that the crypto engine is the absolute last thing you want to cede control of.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
I do agree with Theo that if the information is not free, then vendors should not expect OS writers to bend their principles to include it. On the flip-side, I don't want OpenBSD (or any other free OS) to be impacted by stupidity on the part of vendors if there's anything I can do to help.
My only question of Theo and the OpenBSD folks is: Is there anything that those of us who reject Hifn's arguments as absurd and contrary to accepted practices can do to help? (Well, besides not supporting Hifn in any way.)
This is clearly a case where differences in any other opinion should be irrelevent. Theo deserves support on this. Open Source in general deserves support on this.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
And if you had read the threads here you'd notice a lot of people care if OpenBSD supports something, people who don't even use OpenBSD check to see if it supports a particular device prior to purchase, since OpenBSD has a very strong stance on free and open , one significantly stronger than the likes of your average Linux project and decidedly stronger than the other BSDs.
You may also have noticed how many people point out that when you are dealing with cryptography or security, you deal with OpenBSD. Hifn's cards are used in several places, but notably in the security field, where OpenBSD lives. OpenBSD users are the target demographic for crypto acceleration cards.
Theo isn't the idiot here, as Hifn obviously cares, they cared enough to talk to the misc@ mailing list and try to get people on their side.
I admit I would rather someone of Theo's importance use a little more diplomatic speach, but I don't bother myself, so why should I hold him to a higher standard than I hold myself?
I'm sick of following my dreams - I'm just going to ask them where they're going and hook up with them later.
One resource that ATI doesn't have enough of is time. They don't have a lot of manpower dedicated to the Linux drivers so there's less effort put into fixing things like this- they're worrying more about piling new exposed features (which is also desired as well...). If there were open source drivers, there'd be a good chance someone like myself would fix the problem in question (I can do this sort of thing, I used to work on the FIRST set of open source Accelerated Drivers (Utah-GLX), which is why I've got a G3 Mac given me by John Carmack (Still in my possession), I've loads of acquaintances from out of Loki Games, and I'm doing work for Linux Game Publishing.)- because I've the skills and I have the time and desire to see it fixed- and the only reason why I've time is that it's a blocker for me to use this laptop I'm posting with as a development machine.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Is Hifn's hardware supported in Linux?
Not in the kernel tree, but there is a third-party driver available. My understanding from associates who work with the Linux version is it isn't as feature-rich as the OpenBSD driver, and those who develop on it are also frustrated by Hifn's new policies.
What percentage of their customers rely on OpenBSD support? Who are they more loyal to, Hifn for the hardware or OpenBSD for the OS?
As someone who works for a place that uses crypto cards, I can tell you: we are more bound to the OS than the crypto hardware. There's a lot of different crypto hardware on the market, but if you want to do any kind of hardcore embedded systems development using a POSIX API, there aren't a lot of choices out there.
For all that people accuse Theo de Raadt of being abrasive, singleminded, and ideological, we NEED people like him. It's the de Raadts and the Stallmans, the ones who refuse to back down in the face of corporate and (soon) government pressure, who make the open source movement possible. I think this very same bloody-minded stubbornness is one of the most important things he brings to the table. I admire his convictions and worry about his blood pressure. Theo, if you're reading this: don't give up!
~Eien no Inori wo Sasagete~ Searching for my Hatsumi...