Most active commenters
  • thomastjeffery(3)

←back to thread

Remotely Compromising Android and iOS via a bug in Broadcom's WI-FI Chipsets

(blog.exodusintel.com)
387 points pedro84 | 14 comments | 26 Jul 17 19:51 UTC | HN request time: 1.028s | source | bottom
Show context
thomastjeffery ◴[26 Jul 17 23:00 UTC] No.14861166[source]▶
Why does Broadcom insist on proprietary drivers?

How could it possibly be detrimental for Broadcom to have free software drivers?

This article is a poignant example that it is detrimental for them to continue to keep their drivers proprietary.

replies(6): >>14861174 #>>14861519 #>>14862058 #>>14863796 #>>14867469 #>>14871284 #
whowouldathunk ◴[26 Jul 17 23:01 UTC] No.14861174[source]▶
The drivers are probably pretty complicated and thus valuable IP.
replies(2): >>14861236 #>>14867384 #
1. thomastjeffery ◴[26 Jul 17 23:15 UTC] No.14861236[source]▶
I don't buy that.

Every wifi chipset has working drivers; therefore there is little to no value in Broadcom's driver as "IP".

Contrast that to the value of having a free driver that can receive security patches from anyone at any time.

replies(6): >>14861326 #>>14861646 #>>14862004 #>>14862013 #>>14862510 #>>14863716 #
2. johncolanduoni ◴[26 Jul 17 23:29 UTC] No.14861326[source]▶
Every GPU has working drivers, but optimizations within them can make huge differences in performance on the same hardware.
replies(3): >>14861387 #>>14861468 #>>14861658 #
3. thomastjeffery ◴[26 Jul 17 23:40 UTC] No.14861387[source]▶
Comparing a Wifi chipset to a video card is like comparing a bicycle to a sports car.
4. monocasa ◴[26 Jul 17 23:55 UTC] No.14861468[source]▶
The driver 'optimizations' in GPUs tend to boil down to hand written replacements for unoptimal/broken shaders and API call sequences on a per application basis.

I expect a network card to not 'interpret' my traffic in a similar way.

replies(2): >>14861597 #>>14861620 #
5. vvanders ◴[27 Jul 17 00:18 UTC] No.14861597{3}[source]▶
As someone who spent a ton of time in this space(working with most mobile GPU vendors from Android E to L) you're talking about things just at the surface.

The way the drivers + backing architecture are built contains tons of IP and things that they would very much not want their competitors seeing.

Our team built our reputation and relationship on keeping that data separate and confidential despite working with just about every vendor out there.

6. agumonkey ◴[27 Jul 17 00:23 UTC] No.14861620{3}[source]▶
Adding the double blind optimizations leading to absurdly complex drivers that tries to guess how user code tries to guess driver logic... maybe vulkan will help open source GPU drivers in the end.
7. gleenn ◴[27 Jul 17 00:28 UTC] No.14861646[source]▶
Tell that to the Open and guys who have been dying for wifi drivers for years. They are definitely not all open. Furthermore, not nearly as many people are running alternative OSes on their phones as they are on other types of computers.
8. fulafel ◴[27 Jul 17 00:30 UTC] No.14861658[source]▶
GPU drivers are very bug ridden and 3D apps can easily cause OS crashes. Apps are tested so they don't trigger those bugs. Witness all the complaint comments on webgl posts about machine crashes - and that's with a thick driver bug workaround layer in browsers.
9. freyir ◴[27 Jul 17 01:45 UTC] No.14862004[source]▶
Every wifi chipset has working drivers

Every existing Wi-Fi chipset has working drivers. A startup begins from scratch, which is one more barrier to entry.

replies(1): >>14862140 #
10. colordrops ◴[27 Jul 17 01:48 UTC] No.14862013[source]▶
It's not that other chipsets have working drivers, but that am open driver would reveal technical secrets of both their software and hardware design. Not saying I agree with proprietary drivers though.
11. justbuchanan ◴[27 Jul 17 02:11 UTC] No.14862140[source]▶
True, but there are many open-source wi-fi drivers out there already. Unless broadcom's implementation is something out of the ordinary, releasing their driver doesn't really change the game.
replies(1): >>14863022 #
12. hedora ◴[27 Jul 17 03:35 UTC] No.14862510[source]▶
I'd argue most wifi chipsets do not have working drivers, but I have an apparently high bar for "working": It has to stay authenticated to a given access point indefinitely, can't kernel panic or require reboots to switch to a new network, and needs to have competitive throughout and tail latencies under load.

Most wifi adapters fail at least one of these requirements under windows or linux.

13. cyphar ◴[27 Jul 17 06:11 UTC] No.14863022{3}[source]▶
And experience with Broadcom's wireless drivers (and NFC chips) tells me that the only thing extraordinary about them is how awful and limited they are.
14. londons_explore ◴[27 Jul 17 09:20 UTC] No.14863716[source]▶
Many of the "features" of a wifi chipset are implemented in drivers or firmware. QoS? Smarter packet scheduling? Better interference protection? All of those are likley in the drivers.

Competitors could review the code and "copy" how great features work without actually copying the code.