Slashdot Mirror


From "Happy Hacking" to "Screw You"

tquid writes "Trying to bridge the digital divide in Canada's poorest postal code, a principled group of hackers adopt "open source"-based technology spun off from an MIT project. Then the terms on the hardware are changed, and changed again, and then firmware to lock out the frustrated group's software is installed, screwing them out of their investment and many hours of development work."

13 of 243 comments (clear)

  1. Anyone know the details of the MIT agreement? by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Wasn't this was originally developed as an open source project at MIT? I imagine their original agreement with MIT probably precluded this very thing (locking it down). If not, I would be very disappointed with MIT.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:Anyone know the details of the MIT agreement? by mrvan · · Score: 5, Funny
      If they used the MIT license they're pretty much screwed...

      It is a permissive license, meaning that it permits reuse within proprietary software ...

    2. Re:Anyone know the details of the MIT agreement? by JustinOpinion · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Part of the problem is that the company (Meraki) pushed firmware upgrades to all the units, including older boxes purchased before their revised licensing model. The new firmware locks down the units, making it impossible to hack them and impossible to load custom firmware and bypass the new locks.

      That's the really sleezy part--changing your licensing terms for new sales is annoying for loyal customers, but obviously can't apply retroactively to goods you've already sold. But this company is doing just that--trying to retroactively impose their new licensing and payment model onto units that were already sold under an open, permissive terms.

      So even though they still have the free code, they are now blocked from loading the code onto their own purchased hardware. It's probably not impossible--a talented hacker can maybe bypass the firmware and load custom code again... but of course they shouldn't have to. It seems to me that Meraki has more or less broken into customer devices without permission and made unrequested changes--rather illegal as far as I know.

  2. Article text by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    (Article loaded very slowly for me, so it will likely be slashdotted soon.)

    I've been following the development of mesh wifi technology for several years now. From the moment I first grokked what was going on with it, it struck me as a great disruptive technology. One of the most successful early projects, and one that I followed with a great deal of interest was MIT's Roofnet project - an implementation of commodity hardware and open source software, built on Linux, which provides wifi coverage for MIT's campus.

    In 2006 a spin-off company named Meraki was formed to develop and commercialize the MIT Roofnet technology. At the time I was on the board of the Vancouver Community Network and had been championing more development of wireless technology. We immediately ordered 9 of the first beta units to try out. The technology was cheap ($50/unit) and it worked but what prevented us from going any further with it was the pricing model that they decided to adopt - $5/node/month for access to the "dashboard" - the real-time monitoring software that they were developing for managing the networks. We decided that this cost was prohibitive for our purposes and the Merakis were shelved.

    In September of 2007 I heard about a group of Vancouver community wifi enthusiasts who were getting together with the goal of setting up community wifi in Canada's poorest neighbourhood. I came out to a meeting and invited along some people whom I know are interested in any project that is about bridging the digital divide. The technology that was trumpeted at that meeting was Meraki. Since my previous brush with them they had changed their pricing structure and now they would let you run a free network (with free access to their dashboard) or a subscription (paid) network for 10% of your charges. We (the group, which came to call itself " FreeTheNet ") were unanimous that the free option was what we wanted to do and we quickly began building out a public network.

    In October Meraki announced that they were changing their pricing model (yet again) and that they would be vastly raising the costs of their hardware (tripling, in fact). I remember going to their website to learn more about what they were doing and their new marketing slogan was something like "Build your business using exciting new technology where the rules of the game keep changing " How ironic; I wish I'd kept a screenshot of that! Under their new system there was no way that we could build out the network we envisioned. At roughly that point, one of our most experienced hackers said "forget Meraki", we're going to write our own firmware and dashboard and promptly started researching that. By late Novermber he was able to demostrate an open routing firmware called B.A.T.M.A.N. running with a mesh helper inside called Robin, that provided the same functionality as the Meraki firmware. This could be installed in the commodity Meraki hardware which greeted you with a friendly and encouraging "happy hacking" when you logged into it via the console.

    Over December and January he worked on adding features that we wanted to our network to have (and that we had previously been encouraging Meraki to build to improve their system - things like per node custom splash screen, enhancements to the dashboard to improve scalability, etc.) All of this was being tested on Meraki hardware because this is what we had spent our money on back when they supported and encouraged the kind of work we were doing.

    Then in February Meraki announced a change to their EULA (End User Licence Agreement) which precluded anyone from changing any of the software that they install on t

  3. Re:I don't think they are viable by masonc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I talked to Meraki about using their mesh network fro a resort I wanted to equip, but when I asked what would happen to our investment if they went belly up, they told me it the network hardware would be unusable if that happened. I said thanks but that's not acceptable.
    Who would walk a client into that sort of scenario? How many bright hopeful startups have we seen disappear without a mention? It's not like they would ever be honest and tell you they are running low on cash.
    I wouldn't mind if their service was value added, billing or accounting or something, but the network could still be used in the event they vanished. If the hardware was open and I could install a Open Source version later, I might have done it.
    Maybe Meraki needs to revisit their model and look at it from a customer's viewpoint.

    --
    CM www.cometenergysystems.com Blog: http://caribbeanrenewable.blogspot.com/
  4. Re:Vendor lockin is a myth by JustinOpinion · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What did they expect? They probably expected to pay the list price for the quoted product.

    The company is taking a loss on each box at $50. That's the company's problem, of course. They are of course free to charge more or less for the devices whenever they want.

    So Meraki then does all it can do at that point, force the HW to only run the special software and try to get back into the market. Ah... so I see you missed the part where Meraki pushed firmware upgrades to existing units? They basically forced new software onto older units which lock them out. So, in effect, they sold a device with certain promises (namely, "open!") at a certain price, and then afterwards log into the devices and load new software to prevent the owners of the hardware from exercising the rights that were granted to them under the original contract terms. As far as I know, logging-into someone else's hardware (and then changing the software so that the hardware is now under your control) without their permission is illegal.

    The hackers (especially those who put some kind of trust in "openness") are the ones who ruined the municipal network for everyone. They showed a clear lack of political savvy and it ended up turning what could have been a boon for both the city and Meraki into a political morass which ends up with no one at all happy. I disagree. If the company was indeed selling the units at a loss, then that is their own stupidity. Customers taking advantage of what you offer ("open, hackable, access point for $50!") is their legal right and frankly is sensible. I disagree that giving into corporate demands at every turn is "political savvy". The company screwed them (and possibly broke the law), so they are warning others not to deal with that company, and it seems like they are going to try to find other hardware suppliers in the future.
  5. Re:Vendor lockin is a myth by mgblst · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How the hell would they now whether or not the company was taking a loss on each box? Is this something I need to research on everything I buy? You seem to consider this ok? Maybe I should check out the details on my monitor, to make sure that I am not supposed to make up some of the income for the company by visiting certain websites.

    If some company screws up and sells my "faulty" goods, then how is this any of my responsibility. And how does this allow them to go in and change the goods they already sold me?

    I am having great difficulty understanding your logic on this one.

  6. Re:So talk to them? by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Funny

    Have you ever tried talking technology with a lawyer? Talking nuclear physics with a pig is more rewarding.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  7. Open-Mesh: The Open Source Meraki Alternative by qw0ntum · · Score: 5, Informative

    This decline was something people have foreseen for a while. There is a rapidly maturing collection of open source projects to create a real open source Meraki replacement (disclaimer: I am helping develop one of these).

    ROBIN is an open source mesh firmware that can run on reflashed Meraki nodes (well, I don't think it's "allowed" by Meraki anymore, since they've changed their license agreement to forbid 3rd party firmware and have made it really difficult to access the bootloader).

    Open-Mesh is the dashboard management service that ROBIN nodes are configured to use. The guy who develops this actually started working on this dashboard when Meraki was still Roofnet - compare the Open-Mesh dashboard to the Meraki dashboard, the similarity is obvious. Also, you can buy pre-flashed, fully featured ROBIN nodes from Open-Mesh.com for $50 each, the same price that Meraki sells their crippled "standard version" of their nodes.

    OrangeMesh, is an open-source version of the dashboard being developed that will allow you to host your own dashboard server, completely freeing you from reliance on any third party. You can check out it's progress here.

    --
    'Every story, if continued long enough, ends in death.' --Ernest Hemingway
  8. Re:Vendor lockin is a myth by Broofa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You're blaming the "hackers" for this? This was a project for a poor community with a limited, fixed budget. The hackers got involved because volunteer efforts were likely the only way this project was going to happen. The only thing that changed was that Meraki switched from one unaffordable model to a different, still-unaffordable one, and in the process alienated a group of hackers with a vested interest in helping them improve their product. Perhaps Meraki should have instead open-sourced their Dashboard code and tried to leverage the efforts of people who are able and willing to help them make it better. And at the same time take a long, hard look at their business model. Because it's threatened by a bunch of hobbyists with some spare time on their hands, they're going to be in real trouble. Rather than trying to extort (too strong a word?) subscription fees for their software, perhaps they would be better served by slightly raising the price on the hardware (which they did) and offering support/services contracts to those customers who can afford them. It's a pretty safe bet that these other customers are going to be evaluating vendors not just on the hardware and software, but also on how open their code is, how robust the user and developer communities are, and whether or not they can count on the vendor (Meraki in this case) to act in their best interests in the future.

  9. Re:Illegal? by TheLinuxSRC · · Score: 5, Informative

    Software licensing isn't the issue; updating his legacy hardware which he purchased under a specific license with specific rights without his knowledge or consent is the issue. Especially when this new firmware update (which he did not authorize but was automatically applied by Meraki despite having been sold with a different EULA) effectively bricks his hardware. This raises the question - Whose hardware is it?

  10. Re:I was considering Meraki... by qw0ntum · · Score: 5, Informative

    Check Open Mesh. Just like Meraki, but open.

    --
    'Every story, if continued long enough, ends in death.' --Ernest Hemingway
  11. Reflashing Merakis by sbrsb · · Score: 5, Informative

    The article suggests that a Meraki software upgrade has made it impossible to reflash them.

    Actually, you can still easily make them revert to an earlier version which can be reflashed.

    As described here:
    http://robin.forumup.it/about99-15-robin.html

    "you can ssh into the Meraki and create edit the /storage/config.local file with whatever you want; in my case:
    Code:
    echo "firmware.mips.version 6-9163" > /storage/config.local"

    And they'll update themselves to an earlier version.

    The founders of Meraki have made huge contributions to open source software and it is good to see that others are taking advantage of their great work and making further improvements.