libreboot
/
lbwww
1
0
Fork 0
Code Packages Projects Releases Activity

update faq to mention intel/amd cooperation 

they are no longer uncooperative. it's still not ideal but
they do actually do some things for coreboot

Signed-off-by: Leah Rowe <leah@libreboot.org>
master
Leah Rowe 2023-09-02 19:54:00 +01:00
parent 28dbd1bd53
commit 643c6d9d8c
2 changed files with 10 additions and 69 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

53
site/faq.md
View File

@ -412,30 +412,14 @@ The git repository for that project is here:
Both the video and the repository give some further insight about CPU
microcode. The way it works on AMD will be very similar to Intel.
### Intel is uncooperative
For years, coreboot has been struggling against Intel. Intel has been
shown to be extremely uncooperative in general. Many coreboot
developers, and companies, have tried to get Intel to cooperate; namely,
releasing source code for the firmware components. Even Google, which
sells millions of *chromebooks* (coreboot preinstalled) have been unable
to persuade them.
Even when Intel does cooperate, they still don't provide source code.
They might provide limited information (datasheets) under strict
corporate NDA (non-disclosure agreement), but even that is not
guaranteed. Even ODMs and IBVs can't get source code from Intel, in
most cases (they will just integrate the blobs that Intel provides).
Newer Intel graphics chipsets also [require firmware
blobs](https://01.org/linuxgraphics/intel-linux-graphics-firmwares?langredirect=1).
The `libreboot` project *does* provide some support for newer Intel platforms, but
you should be aware of these issues if you choose to run those machines.
Freedom pitfalls to consider on AMD hardware {#amd}
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTE: Nowadays there's openSIL <https://github.com/openSIL/openSIL> - it's
AMD's attempt to provide some source code again, that projects like coreboot
can use, but AMD is still problematic; the PSP for example (see below) cannot
be "neutered" (nothing like `me_cleaner`, or *psp\_cleaner*) exists yet.
AMD has more or less the same problem as Intel, when it comes to software
freedom.
@ -528,33 +512,6 @@ the updates are needed on all AMD boards (depends on CPU).
The libreboot project does not consider microcode updates a problem, and it
enables them by default on all supported hardware.
### AMD is uncooperative
AMD seemed like it was on the right track in 2011 when it started
cooperating with and releasing source code for several critical
components to the coreboot project. It was not to be. For so-called
economic reasons, they decided that it was not worth the time to invest
in the coreboot project anymore. Unfortunately they haven't even shared
the source code of AGESA library for a Family 15h Steamroller/Excavator
architectures (which, like the earlier fam15h Bulldozer/Piledriver, do
not have a PSP) and released it to a coreboot project only as a binary.
For a company to go from being so good, to so bad, in just 3 years,
shows that something is seriously wrong with AMD. Like Intel, they do
not deserve your money.
Given the current state of Intel hardware with the Management Engine, it
is our opinion that all performant x86 hardware newer than the AMD
Family 15h CPUs (on AMD's side) or anything post-2009 on Intel's side
is defective by design and cannot safely be used to store, transmit, or
process sensitive data. Sensitive data is any data in which a data
breach would cause significant economic harm to the entity which created
or was responsible for storing said data, so this would include banks,
credit card companies, or retailers (customer account records), in
addition to the "usual" engineering and software development firms.
This also affects whistleblowers, or anyone who needs actual privacy and
security.
Hi, I have &lt;insert random system here&gt;, is it supported?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

26
site/faq.uk.md
View File

@ -400,30 +400,14 @@ Revealed (Розкрито вбудовану технологію безпек
І відео, і репозиторій дають деяку додаткову інформацію про мікрокод
ЦП. Те, як це працює на AMD, буде дуже схожим на Intel.
### Intel не співпрацює
Роками coreboot бореться з Intel. Виявилося, що Intel загалом
вкрай відмовляється від співпраці. Багато розробників coreboot
і компаній намагалися залучити Intel до співпраці; а саме,
випуск джерельного коду для компонентів мікропрограми. Навіть Google, що
продає мільйони *хромбуків* (з попередньо встановленим coreboot) не змогла їх
переконати.
Навіть коли Intel співпрацює, вони все одно не надають джерельний код.
Вони можуть надавати обмежену інформацію (таблиці даних) відповідно до суворої
корпоративної NDA (угоди про нерозголошення), але навіть це не
гарантується. Навіть ODM та IBV не можуть отримати джерельний код від Intel, в
більшості випадків (вони просто інтегрують блоки, надані Intel).
Новіші графічні чіпсети Intel [вимагають блобів
прошивки](https://01.org/linuxgraphics/intel-linux-graphics-firmwares?langredirect=1).
Проект `libreboot` *надає* деяку підтримку для новіших платформ Intel, але
вам варто знати про ці проблемні питання, якщо ви вибираєте використовувати ці машини.
Підводні камені свободи, які слід враховувати на апаратному забезпеченні AMD {#amd}
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTE: Nowadays there's openSIL <https://github.com/openSIL/openSIL> - it's
AMD's attempt to provide some source code again, that projects like coreboot
can use, but AMD is still problematic; the PSP for example (see below) cannot
be "neutered" (nothing like `me_cleaner`, or *psp\_cleaner*) exists yet.
AMD має більш-менш ту саму проблему, що й Intel, коли справа
стосується свободи програмного забезпечення.