Slashdot Mirror


Talos Secure Workstation Is Free-Software Centric — and $3100 [Updated]

jones_supa writes: These days, the motivation to use open source software for many people is to avoid backdoors placed by intelligence organizations and to avoid software that has hidden privacy-intruding characteristics. For the operating system and userspace software, open choices are already available. The last remaining island has been the firmware included in various ROM chips in a computer. Libreboot has introduced an open BIOS, but it is not available for newer systems featuring the Intel ME or AMD PSP management features. Talos' Secure Workstation fills this need, providing a modern system with 8-core POWER8 CPU, 132 GB RAM, and open firmware. The product is currently in a pre-release phase where Raptor Engineering is trying to understand if it's possible to do a production run of the machine. If you are interested, it's worth visiting the official website. Adds an anonymous reader about the new system, which rings in at a steep $3100: "While the engineers found solace in the POWER8 architecture with being more open than AMD/Intel CPUs, they still are searching for a graphics card that is open enough to receive the FSF Respect Your Freedom certification." Update: 02/08 18:44 GMT by T : See also Linux hacker and IBM employee Stewart Smith's talk from the just-completed linux.conf.au on, in which he walks through "all of the firmware components and what they do, including the boot sequence from power being applied up to booting an operating system." Update: 02/08 23:30 GMT by T :FSF Licensing & Compliance Manager Joshua Gay wrote to correct the headline originally appeared with this story, which said that the Talos workstation described was "FSF Certified"; that claim was an error I introduced. "The FSF has not certified this hardware," says Gay, "nor is it currently reviewing the hardware for FSF certification." Sorry for the confusion.

117 comments

  1. Duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    Open =/= Secure

    I dont like how this is being used interchangeably here

    1. Re:Duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Open =/= Secure

      I dont like how this is being used interchangeably here

      Open == Auditable

      With closed hardware you don't have the ability to verify that it's secure and trustworthy. With open hardware you would.

    2. Re:Duh by hey! · · Score: 1

      I didn't read this as saying "open == secure"; rather I read it as "secure -> open", which is a very different thing.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    3. Re:Duh by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

      How are you going to verify the silicon? Does the NIC send a few random packets to an ip address? You'd never know without auditing every packet sent.

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    4. Re:Duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed, but at least you can be sure that there is no built-in spyware.
      That's one of the a number of security aspects, and an important one for me.
      However, as a scientist, I would prefer to wait for a machine based on a Power9 processor with hardware quad precision floating-point (128bit IEEE) support. There are some projects in which I'm involved that are limited by the precision given by standard 64-bit double-precision format. I could give strong arguments for spending this amount of money (and even some more, but not 3 times as much) on a Power9 based system when they become available, which will take at least 2 years.

    5. Re:Duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      uh... tell that to all the people deconstructing closed hardware chips and imaging the silicon for audit... you're an idiot.

    6. Re:Duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      only a fucking idiot wouldn't think it's possible to cryptorgraphically hide backdoors in silicon

    7. Re:Duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Using another machine as a router/bridge to analyze the network packets is not rocket science.
      As least you cane be sure that the firmware does not play with the network interface in undisclosed ways.

    8. Re:Duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's based on OpenPOWER, so someone could at least verify the design.

      But, you're right. Because it's impossible to audit every single aspect of the machine, it's therefore not worth auditing any of it. (That necessarily follows from your equivocation between something that is more audit-friendly than something else.) Thus, auditing has no worth whatsoever.

    9. Re:Duh by Ixpath · · Score: 1

      The thing you can audit is the firmware. At least in theory.

    10. Re:Duh by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      How do you verify that every bit of your food isn't poisoned/contaminated/adulterated in some way?

      Of course, if you gave up eating altogether, that uncertainty would go away.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    11. Re:Duh by arth1 · · Score: 1

      Agreed, but at least you can be sure that there is no built-in spyware.

      Well, no, you can't, unless you build and burn the firmware yourself. Binary code being different from the alleged source code has happened before.

    12. Re: Duh by aaronb1138 · · Score: 0

      Power8, plus all F/OSS. Clearly designed for the software developer who has convinced their boss that 95% of their time should be dedicated to reinventing the wheel rather than the customary 25-50% most developers spend rolling their own bad implementations of known solutions.

      The only plus side is the generous RAM. I think there is plenty of room in the x86-64 space for that amount of RAM at that price point.

      If one is so paranoid as to need some special rig certified like this, one should a) not be using computing devices and b) realize much like encrypted traffic (e.g. VPN) owning and using such a computer lights you up like a Christmas tree to security services.

    13. Re: Duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not even then. See Ken Thompson's Turing Award lecture from 1984.

    14. Re:Duh by FatdogHaiku · · Score: 2

      Well, if you audit your food you will be disgusted...
      http://www.fda.gov/food/guidanceregulation/guidancedocumentsregulatoryinformation/sanitationtransportation/ucm056174.htm
      If that's too long, CBS made a little photo tour
      http://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/11-revolting-things-government-lets-in-your-food/
      and then there is water, no simple chart from the EPA on that...
      http://www.epa.gov/dwreginfo/drinking-water-rule-quick-reference-guides.

      We got to the point that you have to roll your own BIOS. So we have already lost, for if we go to all that trouble, we will have the only secure machine, as far as we know... and what will we hook it to?

      --
      You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
    15. Re:Duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fact is that you can. It's easy to brick the system, but you are allowed to reflash everything with your own files.

    16. Re: Duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also with closed hardware, once the firmware is patches you may not be able to return it to a secure state. This you might be able to.

    17. Re:Duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Open == Auditable

      With closed hardware you don't have the ability to verify that it's secure and trustworthy. With open hardware you would.

      But ultimately you probably still can't. Hell look at OpenSSL, there are bugs in that thing left, right and center and that's a relatively small project used by an enormous amount of people.

      You can idealize that is "auditable" but practically speaking that is just rubbish.

    18. Re: Duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Power8, plus all F/OSS. Clearly designed for the software developer who has convinced their boss that 95% of their time should be dedicated to reinventing the wheel rather than the customary 25-50% most developers spend rolling their own bad implementations of known solutions. .

      You must be the kind of person that only buys winning lottery tickets, and finds things in the first place you look using a search engine that always returns one and only one result. The rest of us "reinvent" the wheel because we can't find one on Amazon that matches bizarre non-specifications we are given- "Can't you make it more webbish?"

    19. Re:Duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the point. It is completely impractical and almost impossible to do so yet you still have people chanting "it's auditable" like that's an advantage.

    20. Re: Duh by exomondo · · Score: 1

      The only plus side is the generous RAM. I think there is plenty of room in the x86-64 space for that amount of RAM at that price point.

      That price does not include the RAM...or GPU or SSD/HDD or case.
      For around $3,100 USD, security-minded individuals and corporations can own a Talos Secure Workstation mainboard with an entry-level 8-core 130W POWER8 CPU, heatsink / fan assembly, and ATX I/O shield.
      https://raptorengineeringinc.com/TALOS/prerelease.php

    21. Re: Duh by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I dunno about all the rest but I just recently had a new laptop built and shipped to me. Well, it's not a laptop per se - it's a mobile workstation. At any rate, I've yet to figure out what to do with more than 16 GB of RAM. I don't notice much of a speed increase when I go from there to 32 GB of RAM. My laptop has 64 GB of RAM and, try as I might, I've not yet found one useful way to use that RAM and I've not noted one bit of speed increase from 32 GB - at all.

      Oh, it's fast. It's blazingly fast. It has a couple of SSDs in there so I can keep the OS and /home on one drive and I've not actually got it configured with a /swap at all. I have the OS set to push about as much as it possibly can to RAM and have a dozen applications open, across three virtual desktops, and a few browsers on top of that and I'm at 7.5 GB of reported RAM usage.

      WTF are they doing on a workstation that needs that much RAM? (Not wants, needs.) That's well into fairly healthy server territory.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    22. Re: Duh by greenfruitsalad · · Score: 1

      java -Xmx132000m ....

    23. Re: Duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try running Chrome.

    24. Re: Duh by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I have 20 tabs open in Opera, that's based on Chromium. Currently, it indicates that I'm running 6.7 GB. I think I've seen it peak at around 14 GB as I recall - with normal usage. It can eat a bit more when compiling or something similar but that doesn't even really eat a whole lot. Then again, I really don't do as much with a computer as I used to. So much of my time is just as a passive consumer. I'm working to change that - thus the excuse to buy this laptop. It's pretty damned sexy.

      Go stupid with the configuration at this site:
      http://www.titancomputers.com/...

      I got to skip an OS and software but I tweaked the rest and spent a silly amount of money but it's worth it, in my opinion. Then again, I probably wouldn't have bought it if my opinion was not that it was worth it. So, there's that. However, have a look if you want. I gotta tell you... I've been *very* pleased with my purchase. It runs Lubuntu just fine and I've not even had to install the proprietary drivers - even the camera works. Hell, I don't actually use the camera for anything but I tested it and it's surprisingly good. It's not easy to find a good, full size, laptop. I splurged and got a couple of external drives from them - including the optical drive. I could have picked those up anywhere and at a better price but, what the hell.

      At any rate, it's a fantastic piece of equipment but far more power than I use. Even as I sort of move back to the point where I'm less of a consumer, it's still more power than I need. Even if it would be slow, I could probably manage just fine on 4 GB of RAM and 8 would be enough. As I mentioned above, there's some difference when I go to from 16 to 32 as I do, sometimes, use more RAM than that. But, normally that's not the case and I don't believe I've done so on this laptop yet. I've had it for more than a month and I really don't think I've gone above 14 GB or so. So, I've put 64 in a few boxes and this laptop has 64 but I'm still trying to figure out what someone would do, meant to be done on a workstation - which is kind of a specific category, that would take 256 GB of RAM.

      To be fair, I thought it was 128 GB at first. That doesn't change the nature of the beast. Video rendering gets farmed out or done on an in-house server. Video editing, maybe? I thought that was being pushed to a server and run by remote now? Even compiling is now done on a server and not on the workstation. They've got dedicated "build boxes." Maybe CAD? What CAD software has been compiled to run on this architecture?

      I still don't get it. :/

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    25. Re: Duh by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I do program a little bit but I am not a programmer - even though I have done a lot of programming in the past. While I was programming I was not really a very good programmer. Oh, it worked. Eventually. It even did much of what I wanted, in some fashion. I had someone with me at the start, he was a CS grad who did more "ops" than "dev." I just kind of asked him if he wanted to help so he doesn't really count for this metric. The first person I hired, after the business was running, was a programmer.

      I programmed in C but I did some Perl, some BASIC, even some QBASIC at one point. Oh, I can bang out bad code in a handful of languages even today. I am not a programmer. I do not even have a passing familiarity with Java though, funny enough, I've been talking about learning it lately because I have a project at hand and it's more difficult than I thought it would be. I turns out, there are no handy dandy libraries for what I want to do in C. However, Java has a library for everything. Java has a library to optimize the efficiency of a sock gnome, complete with web interaction and remote hosting. And yes, you can bundle it into a .jar and have it work across all the major platforms...

      At any rate, I mention that to basically tell you that I have no idea what you're talking about. So, I went to the all-knowing Google. The whole phrase as a search query was not refined enough. I took out the "Java" and it returned one result. That result might mean something - as it appeared to be sort of topical. It was a bug, on RedHat's bug-tracker about JBoss using too much memory.

      https://bugzilla.redhat.com/sh...

      I read it and I am still not entirely sure what is going on. It looks like they're setting some sort of Java setting via the terminal. At first blush, it looks like they're setting Java to use more than 128 GB. So, unless I'm missing something then I am lost. 'Cause I'm not exactly sure why you'd need to set Java to use that much RAM. I'm usually pretty imaginative but I can't even think of why someone'd want to do that on a workstation or a server. Being exactly the opposite of an expert, I'm pretty sure that if you're using 128 GB of RAM with your Java app then you're either doing something brilliant or you're doing something horribly wrong.

      I guess I could benchmark it and use a burn-in test to get the RAM to peg out at full. I don't think I've done a benchmark or burn-in for a lot of years. I just don't bother any more. Hmm... I need a good forum to show them off. What's the point of doing all that if you can't show off the numbers? ;-)

      But, really, I'm not really sure why anyone would want to run your command. Someone probably has a good reason. Not me. :/

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    26. Re: Duh by greenfruitsalad · · Score: 1

      it was a joke. java (jvm) will eventually fill all available memory if you allow it to (with that -Xmx switch). if you just want to see your ram filled up, simply use java software like cassandra, elasticsearch or hello_world and wave your memory bye bye.

      i also have 64 gigs of ram and it often isn't enough when i play with virtual machines.

  2. Re:Mostly for criminals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I have plenty of things to hide and I have broken no laws. I have a right to be secure in my papers. I have the right to hide communications I have made with my associates, especially when it comes to political communications.

    You can take your fascist "IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE" bullshit and shove it straight up your ass.

  3. Re:Mostly for criminals by Yonder+Way · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Nobody ever said that Free Software = Cheap. "Free as in speech, not as in beer" is often heard. This is Free Software 101 stuff.

    As for not imagining anyone spending that kind of money on a workstation, compared to what it'll get you in the Apple Store, some would call it a bargain. Note that it's being called a "workstation" and not a "desktop". For some people, there is a real difference.

  4. FPGA GPU is About it ... by LuxuryYacht · · Score: 1

    if you want an open enough GPU card. It won't have much for GPU performance but it could be all open. Oh and don't forget to only use the fully open FPGA tools or kittens may die.

    --
    Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur
    1. Re:FPGA GPU is About it ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We need an open source fab as well.

    2. Re:FPGA GPU is About it ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kitten massacre ahead! I wonder how far the OpenFPGA project has progressed at this point.

  5. Re:Mostly for criminals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Open source can be really expensive. I was interested in the GNU radio project when it was announced but then found out it needed a few thousand dollars in hardware. Yeah your fucking software is free but without the hardware its worthless. Nobody cared about that project until the discovery of the debug feature in $10 RealTek dongles. A receiver that does 22Mhz to 1700Mhz without gaps and close to 3Mhz of bandwidth.

  6. POWER8? by MMC+Monster · · Score: 1

    Does it run Microsoft Windows?

    --
    Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    1. Re:POWER8? by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      It wouldn't be secure any more if it did...

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    2. Re:POWER8? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No, and this is a strong selling point, given how much Windows 10 spies on its users, even when you ask it not to report to Redmond.
      Maybe you can emulate it, with suitable filtering on the network packets.

    3. Re:POWER8? by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 2

      What about.

      Mac os X?

      Amiga os 4.X?

    4. Re:POWER8? by MMC+Monster · · Score: 1

      Woosh!

      --
      Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    5. Re:POWER8? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only POWER CPU most people have any familiarity with would be the PowerPC that could barely run MacOS. I assume the POWER8 is better than the PowerPC, in part because it would be a significant Slashdot story if it was somehow worse.

      IFF the hardware becomes popular enough to warrant any attention, Microsoft and other developer shops will compile for it. Currently, it is only supported in Linux because IBM spent a billion to get it supported.

    6. Re:POWER8? by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I wasn't sure if you were setting up for a joke or if you were actually asking a question because you wanted to know the answer. You just never know around here any more...

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    7. Re:POWER8? by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      We had someone earlier who asked what a DLL was just a bit earlier today.

      Even more incredibly, he got modded +5, Informative.

      O tempores, O mores... *weeps*

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    8. Re:POWER8? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We had someone earlier who asked what a DLL was just a bit earlier today.

      Even more incredibly, he got modded +5, Informative.

      O tempores, O mores... *weeps*

      Who let these people in? And how did they get mod points?

    9. Re:POWER8? by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      I've no idea, but I was rattled enough by the notion that I used "earlier" twice in the same sentence.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    10. Re:POWER8? by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      I've no idea, but I was rattled enough by the notion that I earlier used "earlier" twice in the same sentence earlier.

      TFTFM.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    11. Re:POWER8? by MMC+Monster · · Score: 1

      Okay. I guess the community's dumbed down enough that asking whether an open hardware system (running on a POWER chip could run the security nightmare which is Microsoft Windows 10) could run MS Windows could conceivably be a valid question.

      My, how this community has slid. :-(

      I'm just going to go back into lurking mode and tend to my lawn, I guess.

      --
      Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    12. Re:POWER8? by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      It wouldn't be secure any more if it did...

      OH MAN BURN!!!

    13. Re:POWER8? by cheater512 · · Score: 1

      OS/2?

    14. Re:POWER8? by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Don't let it get you down. It seems to be improving enough that I actually remarked on it in my journal earlier. I've noticed a bunch of familiar faces coming back and posting again (though some of them seem a bit sheepish at first). I've noticed a LOT more lower ID numbers in the threads. The quality of conversation and comments has gone up, quite a bit actually, in just the past week and a half. I'm not sure what that says about the person asking about a DLL but it does mean that there *might* be good things in the future.

      Besides, it's not as if you were doing anything better or more constructive. ;-)

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    15. Re:POWER8? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought that's what Stack Exchange was for.

    16. Re:POWER8? by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      The signal-to-noise ratio has definitely improved; spamming and clickbait seem to be down quite a lot. Article selection has got heaps better IMNSHO.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  7. Marketing vs real world application by mongothesecond · · Score: 1

    Does the purchase price come with some sort of bond or insurance if the system doesnt live up to the claim?

    1. Re:Marketing vs real world application by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      Advertising must be "legal, decent honest and truthful" (at least, it does in this country), so if you read what is actually said in the advertising, and carefully understand it, then you have redress through standard consumer law if you have an issue.

      Of course, part of the skill of advertising is to say one thing which readers will interpret to mean something else. But that is the fault of advert readers hearing what they want to hear for whatever reason.

      I don't have to write advertising. But I do have to write technical reports that sometimes break extremely expensive bad news to customers. You'll be surprised just how keen people are to hear what they want to hear instead of what you're telling them.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  8. How did they get 132GB RAM? by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

    Certainly it can be done, but I'm not sure why one would want to do that. Did they mean 128GB? Or 32GB?

    I've clicked through the links and I can't find anything that actually says how much RAM you get on this system.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:How did they get 132GB RAM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      According to the prerelease specs page, it's actually 256GB.

    2. Re:How did they get 132GB RAM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      According to the prerelease specs page, it's actually 256GB.

      With ECC! Which makes it look not cheap, but decent. Intel charge an arm (not an ARM) and a leg for ECC capable processors.

    3. Re:How did they get 132GB RAM? by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      Go to page 2 of the phoronix.com link ... 131073MB of RAM (1024x128) ... which, as you point out, is probably 128GB in terms of being 1024x1024x128.

      It is listed, but the interpretation of how much that actually is might be sketchy.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    4. Re:How did they get 132GB RAM? by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      You didn't drill down deep enough. They're not specifying an amount of RAM (it hasn't been released yet; when released they'll probably sell varying configurations), but the specs say "8 DDR3 RDIMM slots w/ ECC support (2 memory controllers, 256GB maximum)".

    5. Re: How did they get 132GB RAM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No they don't. i3 and most Pentiums support ECC.

    6. Re:How did they get 132GB RAM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's about Gigabyts () vs Gibibytes (), here: 132 GB == 128 Gib

    7. Re:How did they get 132GB RAM? by damn_registrars · · Score: 1
      I made it down to that point, which is why I was wondering how the slashdot summary came to

      8-core POWER8 CPU, 132 GB RAM, and open firmware.

      Your interpretation of the website matches my own and for essentially the same reasons.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    8. Re:How did they get 132GB RAM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn, why did the links went dot /dev/null ...?

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibibyte

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigabyte

    9. Re: How did they get 132GB RAM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually they do.

      http://ark.intel.com/search/advanced?ECCMemory=true&MarketSegment=DT

      Filter on desktop (DT) processors that support ECC and you will get quite a lot of i3s, and also some Celerens.

      Now that doesn't mean that the chipset supports it, even though the processor does.

    10. Re: How did they get 132GB RAM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some i3's support ECC, but only if used with a C-series chipset, as in typical server and workstation boards. This is a purely arbitrary and wholly sleazy restriction by Intel, as the memory controller is in the cpu itself, and has nothing to do with the chipset. It is like Intel dictating that you can't wear pants, unless you are wearing a select Intel-approved shirt.

    11. Re:How did they get 132GB RAM? by bug1 · · Score: 1

      With four 33GB.
      They where originally 32GB, but the manufacturer was having a sale and was giving an extra GB free !

      (orsomethinglikethat)

    12. Re: How did they get 132GB RAM? by fnj · · Score: 1

      No they don't. i3 and most Pentiums support ECC.

      Ignoramus. It's the e3 and e5 server/workstation chips that support ECC, not the i3. That said, there are some e3's that are pretty good buys and work in the same socket 1150 and 1151 motherboards as the i3/i5/i7, but it's pretty hard to find MOTHERBOARDS that support ECC RAM for anything less than a king's ransom. Hard but not impossible. There are a couple of excellent Asrock "workstation" socket 1150 ATX motherboards at well under $200, and with excellent specs for desktop use.

      P.S. - "pentiums" - bwahaha - are you caught in a decade or more time warp?

    13. Re: How did they get 132GB RAM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for pointing this out, I did not know about i3.
      So why not i5 and especially i7, I need a beefy workstation for large FPGA synthesis, an i3 will not cut it, now that place and route is mutithreaded. Have you seen the memory requirements for large FPGA these days: 32GB minimum, 48 or 64 recommended, unless you like swapping. Given the amount of memory and the run times, I'd certainly prefer to have ECC RAM.

    14. Re: How did they get 132GB RAM? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Enable ECC fix logging in bios.

      Not running you application. But I once paid the extra for ECC. After a year of more or less full time operation, I had one ECC fix. Granting I had a buttload less memory than today.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    15. Re:How did they get 132GB RAM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A moment of truly high comedy on slashdot: Witness simian mongoloid imbecile gstoddart attempting to play mathematician!

    16. Re: How did they get 132GB RAM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just cut the iNumber chase and get some registered DDR4 memory with the right E5 Xeon, the right being either something from the 16xx or 26xx series. You'll want to be able to put another 64GB in there when the time comes.

    17. Re: How did they get 132GB RAM? by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      Pentium, 2015 model, with ECC.

      http://ark.intel.com/products/...

  9. LOL ... outlawed? by gstoddart · · Score: 1

    But ... but ... didn't the Empire outlaw Talos worship?

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:LOL ... outlawed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Skyrim is for the Nords!

    2. Re:LOL ... outlawed? by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1
      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    3. Re:LOL ... outlawed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't we tell you to stfu, simian mongoloid cretin? Yes, we did gstoddart! Learn to obey you chimpanzee!

    4. Re:LOL ... outlawed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe this company is based in Markarth, Solitude, Riften, Whiterun, or Windhelm?

      Praise Talos!

  10. Re:Mooo cows moo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, cows say "Open == secure".

  11. Thats all well and good but... by Lampman31415 · · Score: 2

    Can it run Crysis at a reasonable framerate?

  12. Re:Mostly for criminals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Oh look, another shitstain of a person who probably whines up a shitstorm whenever some company loses his medical record to hackers or the like, but God forbid anyone try to secure their shit against five-eyed freaks or squinty-eyed chinks, because only terrorists and pedos want to protect their shit from being hacked.

  13. Some security observations by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Making some observations from recent events, I've noticed:

    1) You can order a computer, and the delivery can be intercepted so that spyware can be installed. Especially laptops, which are difficult for the end user to peek inside.

    2) The Intel management engine is essentially an attached microprocessor with complete and total remote control of your system, including access to all peripherals, the network, the disk data, and the ability to wake up and run while the main computer is off.

    3) The Intel built-in programmable number generator was built in a way to be unverifiable. Essentially, the system reads physically generated random data and puts it through a hashing algorithm before giving it to the user. If the random number generator section is damaged (say, if someone modified the chip mask films before fab), you will get much less than the advertized 256-bits of entropy, but because the data is hashed there is no way to tell.

    Buy American!

    1. Re:Some security observations by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      One day a guy told in Reddit that he was able to access his parents' laptop through Intel ME even though the Ethernet chip was supposedly disabled. Creeepyyy.

    2. Re:Some security observations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not creepy, it's working as designed.

      He didn't have network access to the operating system itself or the services running under it, he had network access to the console itself. It's just another form of out-of-band management, similar to ILOM/ALOM/IPMI/etc.

    3. Re:Some security observations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Buy American!

      Needs sarcasm tag

    4. Re:Some security observations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ostensibly, assuming that the management engine itself is perfectly secure, or hasn't already been compromised. With the resources at the disposal of the NSA or other state level agencies, it would be absolutely foolish to assume that the management engine can't be co-opted. It isn't a matter of if, but when. These sort of vulnerabilities don't tend to remain secret either.

    5. Re:Some security observations by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Buy American!

      Given the myriad (and I'm not using that term in jest here) of ways that a computer could be compromised, I am not the least bit worried about 1 and 3. Number 2 is a bit more interesting but so far it's nothing that can't be blocked at a firewall and as always restricting physical access should be a priority.

    6. Re:Some security observations by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      The thing I find most funny about this is that most people pay extra for a motherboard with these features.

  14. Not clear if this is really totally open source - by xtronics · · Score: 1

    Probably not.

    There is firmware in the BMC - the hard drives, several other places - are they making the claim that ALL of these have open source code? Open microcode?

    I didn't see any mention of Linux Bios.. hate getting information via videos.. You really don't need a separate processor to start up the main one - and it provides huge security holes when you do.

    I've wondered what systems the spooks use for their security - there are hints about power 8 - not sure.

  15. Re:Mostly for criminals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    and I have broken no laws

    Oh, but you have.

    I promise you that you have.

    Everyone has.

  16. Re:Mostly for criminals by avandesande · · Score: 1

    It's been more than a decade since there his been a non x86 cpu that is comparable in performance. Good stuff!

    --
    love is just extroverted narcissism
  17. buy continental by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Being located in europe, devices built in the NSA^WUSA are no longer to be considered safe (for those who remember Cisco ...).

  18. Re:Mostly for criminals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nobody ever said that Free Software = Cheap. "Free as in speech, not as in beer" is often heard. This is Free Software 101 stuff.

    As for not imagining anyone spending that kind of money on a workstation, compared to what it'll get you in the Apple Store, some would call it a bargain. Note that it's being called a "workstation" and not a "desktop". For some people, there is a real difference.

    For 3100 we could get a quad core Mac Pro with dual graphics cards. This Talos thing is just a bunch of RAM. Does it even come with flash storage?

  19. Re:Mostly for criminals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you send your letters sealed in an envelope (possibly a security envelope) rather than writing on postcards?

    Why?

  20. Re:Mostly for criminals by Bert64 · · Score: 1

    The same hardware running closed source software is likely to cost even more...
    Software can easily be free of cost, but that's much harder to do with hardware because there is a cost associated with each and every unit produced.

    --
    http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  21. Re:Mostly for criminals by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

    It's about 1½ times what I paid a couple of years ago to have someone build me an x86_64-based workstation with 8x2 cores (Haswell IIRC), 16GB RAM, a heap-big SSD, and a few other choice goodies.

    So... What kind of porn did you say do you like to watch? And what's it worth to you not to have the answer revealed, whether or not you feel like responding to the question?

    --
    Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  22. Re:Mostly for criminals by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

    I've been wanting to buy a reasonably powerful and reasonably priced open machine for a while. You used to be able to get MIPS machines running Loongson CPUs, but they don't seem to be available any more.

    Anyone know of anything suitable?

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  23. Re:Mostly for criminals by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 3, Informative

    I was originally modding, but I feel compelled to point out that the RAM does not appear to be included in that $3100 - just slots. It's just a motherboard, power supply, and the CPU for $3100.

    So what you stated doesn't appear to be accurate in the least.

    Additionally, a previous Phoronix article stated they only got remote access for testing this thing - so at present this is basically the equivalent of a Kickstarter promise.

    It's an interesting idea if you have enough cash, though.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  24. RISC-V by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If all goes well, next year we'll have a truel libre CPU - based on the RISC-V open source ISA. The world needs a hardware equivalent of Linux, and a proprietary chip like IBM's Power ain't it.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RISC-V
    http://riscv.org

  25. Re:Not clear if this is really totally open source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Truly open source means the whole circuitry.

  26. Re:Mostly for criminals by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

    Okay, seems the $3100 is just for the mainboard + CPU. SO maybe not quite as good a deal as I originally thought.

    --
    Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  27. Re: You stupid idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You really ARE an idiot.

  28. I'd consider this by rl117 · · Score: 1

    I still have Mac Mini (Freescale PowerPC G4) which I used for Debian development for half a decade, and which is now idle with a FreeBSD 10.2 install at present, and while I went to Intel and AMD for my last two systems, I'd certainly welcome a return to an affordable POWER system. I've been pretty disappointed in the state of open hardware for a good while.

    I was looking at the offer for an OpenPOWER system from Tyan (http://www.tyan.com/campaign/openpower/) but I'd prefer a workstation rather than a rackmount unit. If it can run FreeBSD, then even better. The only rub is the graphics support; if I can stick in an AMD board and have it work with OpenFirmware and the current open drivers, I'd be quite happy.

  29. Re:Not clear if this is really totally open source by ajdlinux · · Score: 1

    (Disclosure: IBMer working in Power Systems, opinions my own)

    For the BMC, it appears that they're looking to use OpenBMC, a project started by Facebook and now being continued by IBM.

    They're also going to use the OpenPOWER firmware stack - Hostboot for system initialisation, Skiboot for runtime firmware/BIOS and the OCC firmware for on-chip thermal and power management. All of this is Apache-licensed.

    POWER8 processors do require an external CPU to boot them - either an IBM Flexible Service Processor or a third-party BMC. This is the case with all current Power Architecture server chips, though not with Power embedded (Book 3E) chips. Booting a POWER8 chip is a bit more complex than comparable Intel CPUs in this regard, but as far as I'm aware it's primarily a design choice to put the initialisation complexity in firmware rather than hardware.

    Can't comment about the other components of the system - I imagine it'd be fairly challenging to find a hard drive with open source firmware, but I wish them luck... FSF will still certify them as Respects Your Freedom nonetheless, I imagine. I'm still quite excited by this machine, as POWER8 is definitely the best choice for a high-performance libre system.

  30. Cheaper Desktop & Laptop FSF-RYF systems comin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ThinkPenguin's been working on cheap general user-oriented laptops and desktops for years. The problem is it's not feasible to free X86 completely (despite claims by certain people to the contrary and unfortunately this one person has single handedly taken advantage of the community's strong desire for a 100% free modern and more secure laptop.. and whose claims are getting more and more ridicules... note: the person/company I'm referring is NOT FSF endorsed because he is a fraud) and to do a truly 100% free system is nearly impossible. The RYF hardware gets closer- but isn't technically 100% free either in most cases. There may be some exceptions in relation to particular items like wifi adapters, but larger items like laptops are not truly 100% free (you have hard disk firmware and similar in the current RYF laptops).

    There was a talk at FOSDEM (ie TP sponsored) abut an upcoming laptop which has been in development for a while that will be better than what we have with X86 currently (including the best several year old libreboot laptops) and more easily upgradable with long term prospects (ie new CPUs, more memory, better graphics). The design is meant to be cost effective to produce and adapt cheaply to changes in part availability / manufacturing. The first prototype is finished or nearly so (you can find some videos on YouTube).

    Hopefully in the coming months we'll actually be able to put in pre-orders as part of a kickstarter or similar campaign to actually get them manufactured.

    Specs:
    15.6" 1336x768 screen
    Full keyboard
    2GB memory
    ARM CPU (note: AllWinner is cooperating in releasing code despite some criticisms in the Free Software community about violations and the like)

    The CPU is dual core and despite being older and lower end you can actually do things like utilize virtual machines. It's actually pretty good for typical computing applications like word processing, email, web browsing, etc. It's not nearly as bad or impractical as it might seem and there will be better/faster options available as time progresses (presuming people get behind the project). These systems are going to be priced closer to what the average person can afford too. It's estimated to cost between $250-500 USD. That's not too bad for something unique and is price competitive to the garbage sold at stores like Walmart.

  31. Re:Not clear if this is really totally open source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hah, thanks for the links. i'd heard the term "skiboot" at work in the context of IBM/POWER systems and was wondering what the heck people were talking about...

  32. Re: Mooo cows moo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Explain socat.

  33. Limited Market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I really struggle to identify who would actually be interested in such a thing. Oh, I'm sure such people exist but I'll bet it's a tiny market. This machine is expensive for what you get and despite oceans of argy-bargy, no one has ever made a compelling case for open hardware. Not one that made much sense to me.

    Does this system:

    1). Have an attractive price point?
    2). Will it be one of a long line of compatible systems, or is this a one-off experiment?
    3). Are the features compelling (typical speeds and feeds stuff)?
    4). What does the "open" actually buy you? Because the purity and transparency angles are not especially compelling to me;
    5). For all the argy-bargy, what was the last/worst hardware exploit you heard of? And would this do anything about those? The USB BIOS injection bug? The UEFI resident malware?

    My concern is that this system caters to those who like SELinux. And the old NeXT systems. And the Amiga. And BeOS.

    If so then this is an experimental system with a short lifespan. And I don't have time for that nonsense.

  34. Re:Mostly for criminals by exomondo · · Score: 1

    For 3100 we could get a quad core Mac Pro with dual graphics cards. This Talos thing is just a bunch of RAM. Does it even come with flash storage?

    I suspect the comparison to a Mac Pro is not really the point, but no it doesn't come with flash storage. In fact that RAM figure is just the amount that is supported, it doesn't actually come with any.

  35. Re:Mostly for criminals by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Yes but still vastly cheaper than the power stuff used to be. Those CPUs have mostly been priced out of anything other than military budgets. I think at one point a very sleazy sales guy was trying to sell me an 8 core power machine for around the price I could get three 64 core opteron machines with four times the memory. For some stuff the former would be faster, but still impossible to justify in dollar terms.

  36. I'll Wait For v4 by longbot · · Score: 1

    I'm waiting for the Talos IV. I hear it'll be killer.

    --
    I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it! --Longbottle
  37. Mine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's a bit more than what i need for a desktop, but it looks very promising for a server. I'm holding off to see what comes of the A1100, as it's more within my price-range.

  38. Re:Mostly for criminals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > You can take your [...] bullshit and shove it straight up your ass.

    So that means your interlocutor *has* something to hide, after all? Pretty unconfortable way of hiding things, but in a pinch...

  39. Intel ME or AMD PSP management features. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Libreboot has introduced an open BIOS, but it is not available for newer systems featuring the Intel ME or AMD PSP management features."

    Which are government mandated backdoors.
    Intel's even has a on chipset VNC server.

    Can always be remotely be re-enabled.

    The goal is to make sure men can never get rid of the global feminist police state.
    They want to make sure Girls are Never Brides
    (no child marraige).

    >In the United States, as late as the 1880s most States set the minimum age at 10-12, (in Delaware it was 7 in 1895).[8] Inspired by the "Maiden Tribute" female reformers in the US initiated their own campaign[9] which petitioned legislators to raise the legal minimum age to at least 16, with the ultimate goal to raise the age to 18. The campaign was successful, with almost all states raising the minimum age to 16-18 years by 1920.

    >Also: see: Deuteronomy chapter 22 verses 28-29, hebrew allows men to rape girl children and keep them: thus man + girl is obviously fine. Feminists are commanded to be killed as anyone enticing others to follow another ruler/judge/god is to be killed as-per Deuteronomy. It is wonderful when this happens from time to time: celebrate)

  40. Re:Mostly for criminals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >>>I though open source was supposed to be cheap?
    There's the problem right there, it's been taken over by people who just want a free version of Windows.
    Or whatever the kids are copying this week.

  41. There IS an open source GPU by Theovon · · Score: 1

    http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/16/01/20/171226/open-source-gpu-used-for-research

  42. Re:Mostly for criminals by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

    Additionally, a previous Phoronix article stated they only got remote access for testing this thing - so at present this is basically the equivalent of a Kickstarter promise.

    That would be this article?

    How do you make the equation "only getting remote access" EQUALS "the equivalent of a Kickstarter promise."?

    The company are reasonably well-known (I looked at them several years ago when I was considering replacing my day-to-day laptop with one whose video chip hadn't just got static-fried), and they're very open about saying that they're evaluating options for building an entry into this market (see footnote). So they probably have a total of TWO systems at the moment - the one they're experimenting on, and a second one for testing and promotions and customer evaluation. So, are they going to spend hundreds of dollars shipping one of those two systems around a series of publicity sites, giving them (say) 2 days with the machine, and several times a week having to say "we DID tell you you need a 220V power supply. What, it's not booting ... describe the output form the BIOS ..." you're talking tech support hell, and you'll have crippled your development programme.

    The alternative is to set the machine up with remote access via a VPN and displaying the screens remotely on their terminals. Then all hardware issues you have your own technical people on hand. Timing and benchmarking can be carried out just as well. IF the customer has (per my example in the footnote) a data library they want to do a test on, they can send you the hard drive in advance and book a slot on the machine to run their tests next Thursday afternoon.

    Hang on - have you ever actually worked on a time-shared system? One where you prepare your job set one week, and get the tapes of the run and the error logs back a few days later? That's what I think of when I hear "workstation".

    Footnote
    I see workstations like this hauled to site for data acquisition routinely - a few terabytes of new raw data per day, but you need to process it and incorporate it with terabytes of existing data from the surrounding area which has been subject to months of detailed evaluation and interpretation. Someone asked upthread what you'd need to use 128GB of RAM for : seismic data processing will eat that happily. And with a boat for data acquisition running about a half million dollars a day and a crew of 50-odd, you're not going to quibble at tens of kilo-bucks for a workstation or several.

    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"