[Battlemesh] Forced firmware lockdown in EU already passed

Mitar mitar at tnode.com
Sun Sep 6 19:50:40 CEST 2015


> This is not that clear cut in EU: enforcement of Article 3 (3) list
> "essential requirements" is delegated to proposals of which equipment
> will affected by the EU Commission, and these proposals can be blocked
> either by the council or the parliament. Also in the preamble (19)
> states clearly that software verification should not be abused to
> prevent third party software. See below for quotes.

But preamble is not a directive, no? And directive does not contain any
such language.

Also, how do you see in practice that both Article 3 (3) and preamble
(19) would be possible? The only way I see it for a manufacturer to do
that is to accept firmware images signed by a key from EU Commission.
And then it leaves to EU Commission to decide which 3rd party software
is still compliant.

The other options are just to prevent 3rd party firmware images. Or to
require binary blob drivers for WiFi. None of those we really want. So
how exactly do you see that the wording in current directive is not
problematic? How would you in an ideal world implement this in practice
for WiFi devices? If I understand you correctly, what you are saying is
that we should hope this applies only to SDRs and not WiFi?



More information about the Battlemesh mailing list