Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #212393 > unrolled thread

How free is Debian

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  How free is Debian Shahryar Afifi <shahryarafifi@yahoo.com> - 2019-08-08 02:40 +0200
    Re: How free is Debian Judah Richardson <judahrichardson@gmail.com> - 2019-08-08 03:20 +0200
    Re: How free is Debian Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2019-08-08 05:00 +0200
      Re: How free is Debian John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-08-08 05:10 +0200
        Re: How free is Debian rhkramer@gmail.com - 2019-08-08 14:00 +0200
          Re: How free is Debian Brad Rogers <brad@fineby.me.uk> - 2019-08-08 14:30 +0200
            Re: How free is Debian Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2019-08-08 14:50 +0200
            Re: How free is Debian John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-08-08 22:50 +0200
        Re: How free is Debian Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2019-08-08 15:40 +0200
      Re: How free is Debian deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-08-08 06:50 +0200
        Re: How free is Debian John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-08-08 15:10 +0200
          Re: How free is Debian deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-08-09 00:30 +0200
            Re: How free is Debian John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-08-09 02:10 +0200
              Re: How free is Debian Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben@transient.nz> - 2019-08-09 03:20 +0200
                Re: How free is Debian Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2019-08-09 05:30 +0200
              Re: How free is Debian Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2019-08-09 14:00 +0200
                Re: How free is Debian John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-08-09 16:00 +0200
                  Re: How free is Debian Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2019-08-09 16:40 +0200
              Re: How free is Debian Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2019-08-10 10:00 +0200
                Re: How free is Debian Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2019-08-10 10:20 +0200
                Re: How free is Debian John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-08-10 15:00 +0200
                  Re: How free is Debian Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2019-08-10 16:40 +0200
          Re: How free is Debian Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> - 2019-08-09 18:00 +0200
            Re: How free is Debian <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-08-09 18:20 +0200
              Re: How free is Debian John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-08-09 19:40 +0200
            Re: How free is Debian John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-08-09 18:20 +0200
    Re: How free is Debian David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-08-08 06:20 +0200
      Re: How free is Debian Shahryar Afifi <shahryarafifi@yahoo.com> - 2019-08-08 06:30 +0200
        Re: How free is Debian deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2019-08-08 07:00 +0200
        Re: How free is Debian Andrew McGlashan <andrew.mcglashan@affinityvision.com.au> - 2019-08-08 09:40 +0200
          Re: How free is Debian Shahryar Afifi <shahryarafifi@yahoo.com> - 2019-08-08 15:10 +0200
            Re: How free is Debian <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-08-08 15:20 +0200
            Re: How free is Debian The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2019-08-08 15:30 +0200
              Re: How free is Debian Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2019-08-08 15:40 +0200
              Re: How free is Debian Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2019-08-10 10:00 +0200
            Re: How free is Debian Andrew McGlashan <andrew.mcglashan@affinityvision.com.au> - 2019-08-08 16:50 +0200
            Re: How free is Debian John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-08-08 23:10 +0200
              Re: How free is Debian Andrew McGlashan <andrew.mcglashan@affinityvision.com.au> - 2019-08-09 07:30 +0200
        Re: How free is Debian John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-08-08 13:30 +0200
          Re: How free is Debian Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2019-08-08 16:10 +0200
        Re: How free is Debian David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-08-08 15:20 +0200
      Re: How free is Debian john doe <johndoe65534@mail.com> - 2019-08-08 09:00 +0200
        Re: How free is Debian <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-08-08 10:00 +0200
          Re: How free is Debian John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2019-08-08 14:00 +0200
            Re: How free is Debian Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> - 2019-08-09 19:10 +0200

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#212578

I wrote:
> I'd just flat out restrict them to five years.  Twenty is too long.

Andrei writes:
> That would work against inventors as instead of buying useful patents
> companies would just wait 5 years and then use it without any charge.

Anyone can practice an expired patent without any charge.  That's why
they expire.  Companies could wait 20 years now but they usually don't:
it's worth money to be in the market now.  If it was 5 years they'd pay
less, but they'd still pay.

-- 
John Hasler 
jhasler@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212580

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sb, 10 aug 19, 07:50:02, John Hasler wrote:
> I wrote:
> > I'd just flat out restrict them to five years.  Twenty is too long.
> 
> Andrei writes:
> > That would work against inventors as instead of buying useful patents
> > companies would just wait 5 years and then use it without any charge.
> 
> Anyone can practice an expired patent without any charge.  That's why
> they expire.  Companies could wait 20 years now but they usually don't:
> it's worth money to be in the market now.  If it was 5 years they'd pay
> less, but they'd still pay.

Like they did for the cyclonic vacuum cleaner?

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212512

On Thu 08/Aug/2019 15:02:38 +0200 John Hasler wrote:

> These sorts of "licenses" are actually attempts at a civil contract.
> They really have nothing to do with patent or copyright law.  A civil
> contract requires agreement in advance, though.  


I had always considered those must-reply-yes questions akin to
extortion.  My answer reflects the only possibility to use something I
bought, not my free thought.


Best
Ale

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212515

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 05:59:26PM +0200, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
> On Thu 08/Aug/2019 15:02:38 +0200 John Hasler wrote:
> 
> > These sorts of "licenses" are actually attempts at a civil contract.
> > They really have nothing to do with patent or copyright law.  A civil
> > contract requires agreement in advance, though.  
> 
> 
> I had always considered those must-reply-yes questions akin to
> extortion.  My answer reflects the only possibility to use something I
> bought, not my free thought.

There are many countries where such (so-called "shrink-wrap licenses",
because you have to tear the package open to discover it) aren't
legally binding.

Cheers
-- t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212525

t writes:
> There are many countries where such (so-called "shrink-wrap licenses",
> because you have to tear the package open to discover it) aren't
> legally binding.

A true shrink-wrap "license" is one that is visible and readable through
the transparent shrink-wrap package.
-- 
John Hasler 
jhasler@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212516

Alessandro Vesely writes:
> I had always considered those must-reply-yes questions akin to
> extortion.  My answer reflects the only possibility to use something I
> bought, not my free thought.

If the contract is presented before the sale is completed they are not
different from "You must agree to pay us the stated price".  If the
contract is presented afterward they are bluffing.

Determining at what point the sale is completed may not be trivial,
though.
-- 
John Hasler 
jhasler@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212398

On Wed 07 Aug 2019 at 17:33:52 (-0700), Shahryar Afifi wrote:
> With respect to all the contributors, developers, hobbyist and users,
> who made GNU/Linux and Debian and all other distributions possible,
> here lies a humble, ignorance and yet curious question.
> 
> Are all binaries in the kernel code were writing from scratch? Are
> there any binary blobs in the kernel that it was given to developers?
> If amd64 license is not free, how is it that we have amd64 microcode in
> the debian free?

It isn't free; look:

Package: amd64-microcode
Version: 3.20160316.3
Installed-Size: 68
Maintainer: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org>
Architecture: amd64
Recommends: initramfs-tools (>= 0.113~) | dracut (>= 044) | tiny-initramfs
Breaks: intel-microcode (<< 2)
Description: Processor microcode firmware for AMD CPUs
Description-md5: 093f190e183c7cfeca05b52ecd2116e3
Section: non-free/admin
         ↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑
Priority: extra
Filename: pool/non-free/a/amd64-microcode/amd64-microcode_3.20160316.3_amd64.deb
               ↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑
Size: 31116
MD5sum: 7056e449d8bac87d85a4e434379d0e6e
SHA256: f7bddaf712ffaa833ff65ef94bdd86720d55c2c56ae982c3db58181bbe70f147

> and if they are not the same, are we using the full
> potential of our hardware?

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212399

On Wed, 2019-08-07 at 23:11 -0500, David Wright wrote:
> On Wed 07 Aug 2019 at 17:33:52 (-0700), Shahryar Afifi wrote:
> > With respect to all the contributors, developers, hobbyist and
> > users,
> > who made GNU/Linux and Debian and all other distributions possible,
> > here lies a humble, ignorance and yet curious question.
> > 
> > Are all binaries in the kernel code were writing from scratch? Are
> > there any binary blobs in the kernel that it was given to
> > developers?
> > If amd64 license is not free, how is it that we have amd64
> > microcode in
> > the debian free?
> 
> It isn't free; look:
> 
> Package: amd64-microcode
> Version: 3.20160316.3
> Installed-Size: 68
> Maintainer: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org>
> Architecture: amd64
> Recommends: initramfs-tools (>= 0.113~) | dracut (>= 044) | tiny-
> initramfs
> Breaks: intel-microcode (<< 2)
> Description: Processor microcode firmware for AMD CPUs
> Description-md5: 093f190e183c7cfeca05b52ecd2116e3
> Section: non-free/admin
>          ????????????????????????
> Priority: extra
> Filename: pool/non-free/a/amd64-microcode/amd64-
> microcode_3.20160316.3_amd64.deb
>                ????????????????????????
> Size: 31116
> MD5sum: 7056e449d8bac87d85a4e434379d0e6e
> SHA256:
> f7bddaf712ffaa833ff65ef94bdd86720d55c2c56ae982c3db58181bbe70f147
> 
> > and if they are not the same, are we using the full
> > potential of our hardware?
> 
> Cheers,
> David.
> 

Very well said. If debian free is not using amd64 microcode, so what
kernel module runs my cpu as 64bit?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212401

Shahryar Afifi wrote:

> Very well said. If debian free is not using amd64 microcode, so what
> kernel module runs my cpu as 64bit?

I was thinking the CPU is running and not something else running the CPU.
I do not think you need something special to run 64bit CPU as such.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212407

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Hi,

On 8/8/19 2:27 pm, Shahryar Afifi wrote:
> Very well said. If debian free is not using amd64 microcode, so
> what kernel module runs my cpu as 64bit?

Here's part of the problem.....

The CPU has it's own microcode, when you buy it; the motherboard
manufacturer may or may not update the BIOS and if they do, then they
may or may not provide an update to the microcode.

Now, you already have microcode, one way or another, using non-free to
get an update to the microcode is the best you can do as you,
theoretically know you can trust the source of the blob (as much as
you trust Debian AND Intel of course.

You can download microcode directly from Intel, it won't stop it being
a binary blob though.

If you really need more TOTALLY FREE, then consider RISC-V now or in
the future; their may be other viable alternatives, but something will
always get you.... like for instance the blob of firmware with your
mouse or your monitor, even your keyboard.  And yes there are open
source keyboards, but I'm not sure about other components.  Heck, even
your HDD (of any type) has it's own firmware blobs, some of which can
only be sent to the device and never read back.

So, I guess, totally free really means, give up on electronic gear
altogether.

Cheers
A.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iHUEAREIAB0WIQTJAoMHtC6YydLfjUOoFmvLt+/i+wUCXUvRTgAKCRCoFmvLt+/i
+yQ8AP9hVD8LeUMvRA2toVzn4GnyqKWMQfu6Ye1vC5Sgnh3w+wEA3qWXdubgbGeS
0UAt2uTQ/e55wjnS43qws+Da1+fbSTI=
=sWho
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212432

On Thu, 2019-08-08 at 17:37 +1000, Andrew McGlashan wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 8/8/19 2:27 pm, Shahryar Afifi wrote:
> > Very well said. If debian free is not using amd64 microcode, so
> > what kernel module runs my cpu as 64bit?
> 
> Here's part of the problem.....
> 
> The CPU has it's own microcode, when you buy it; the motherboard
> manufacturer may or may not update the BIOS and if they do, then they
> may or may not provide an update to the microcode.
> 
> Now, you already have microcode, one way or another, using non-free
> to
> get an update to the microcode is the best you can do as you,
> theoretically know you can trust the source of the blob (as much as
> you trust Debian AND Intel of course.
> 
> You can download microcode directly from Intel, it won't stop it
> being
> a binary blob though.
> 
> If you really need more TOTALLY FREE, then consider RISC-V now or in
> the future; their may be other viable alternatives, but something
> will
> always get you.... like for instance the blob of firmware with your
> mouse or your monitor, even your keyboard.  And yes there are open
> source keyboards, but I'm not sure about other components.  Heck,
> even
> your HDD (of any type) has it's own firmware blobs, some of which can
> only be sent to the device and never read back.
> 
> So, I guess, totally free really means, give up on electronic gear
> altogether.
> 
> Cheers
> A.

Thank you for this acknowledgment.
Currently I have X61 with Middleton BIOS that claims to be free. Is
that also not the case?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212433

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 06:06:24AM -0700, Shahryar Afifi wrote:
> On Thu, 2019-08-08 at 17:37 +1000, Andrew McGlashan wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On 8/8/19 2:27 pm, Shahryar Afifi wrote:
> > > Very well said. If debian free is not using amd64 microcode, so
> > > what kernel module runs my cpu as 64bit?
> > 
> > Here's part of the problem.....
> > 
> > The CPU has it's own microcode [...]

> > So, I guess, totally free really means, give up on electronic gear
> > altogether.
> > 
> > Cheers
> > A.
> 
> Thank you for this acknowledgment.
> Currently I have X61 with Middleton BIOS that claims to be free. Is
> that also not the case?

It becomes more and more complicated the more you look into it.
Your harddisk? A complete subsystem with a microcontroller in
it, with some custom-made kind of operating system. Your WiFi
adapter? Same story. Sometimes they need firmware blobs, which
the operating system has to somehow make available to them.
Sometimes they do work without the blobs, sometimes the don't.
Sometimes they kind-of work, but have some security vulnerability.

Free is not an end state one can achieve, but a constant uphill
fight.

Or to put it another way, borrowing from somewhere else, "freedom
is not a product, it's a process".

Cheers
-- t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212436

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 2019-08-08 at 09:06, Shahryar Afifi wrote:

> On Thu, 2019-08-08 at 17:37 +1000, Andrew McGlashan wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> On 8/8/19 2:27 pm, Shahryar Afifi wrote:
>> 
>>> Very well said. If debian free is not using amd64 microcode, so 
>>> what kernel module runs my cpu as 64bit?
>> 
>> Here's part of the problem.....
>> 
>> The CPU has it's own microcode, when you buy it; the motherboard 
>> manufacturer may or may not update the BIOS and if they do, then
>> they may or may not provide an update to the microcode.
>> 
>> Now, you already have microcode, one way or another, using
>> non-free to get an update to the microcode is the best you can do
>> as you, theoretically know you can trust the source of the blob (as
>> much as you trust Debian AND Intel of course.
>> 
>> You can download microcode directly from Intel, it won't stop it 
>> being a binary blob though.
>> 
>> If you really need more TOTALLY FREE, then consider RISC-V now or
>> in the future; their may be other viable alternatives, but
>> something will always get you.... like for instance the blob of
>> firmware with your mouse or your monitor, even your keyboard.  And
>> yes there are open source keyboards, but I'm not sure about other
>> components.  Heck, even your HDD (of any type) has it's own
>> firmware blobs, some of which can only be sent to the device and
>> never read back.
>> 
>> So, I guess, totally free really means, give up on electronic gear 
>> altogether.

> Thank you for this acknowledgment. Currently I have X61 with
> Middleton BIOS that claims to be free. Is that also not the case?

I'm not familiar with that particular product, but the BIOS isn't the
CPU firmware, although it may implicitly contain and apply files which
update the CPU firmware; the BIOS is the motherboard firmware, which is
a different kettle of fish.

In addition to the separate objects which Andrew mentioned as
potentially each containing their own firmware blob, there tend to be
distinct firmware for each of the motherboard, CPU, GPU, network adapter
(especially if wireless), sound card, et cetera - many of which latter
may be integrated into the motherboard, but still have their own
firmware blobs, which are not under the control of the motherboard
manufacturer.

The motherboard firmware may well contain copies of the firmware blobs
for these integrated devices, and apply them as appropriate, but that
doesn't necessarily mean that the motherboard maker has any control over
what's in those blobs or what they do.

As far as I'm aware, there are significantly more projects out there to
produce free motherboard firmware (BIOS / UEFI images) than there are to
produce free firmware for any of those other things.

-- 
   The Wanderer

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
progress depends on the unreasonable man.         -- George Bernard Shaw

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212438

On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 09:20:29AM -0400, The Wanderer wrote:
>I'm not familiar with that particular product, but the BIOS isn't the
>CPU firmware, although it may implicitly contain and apply files which
>update the CPU firmware; the BIOS is the motherboard firmware, which is
>a different kettle of fish.

In modern usage "BIOS" isn't as limited as it was on an IBM PC. E.g., on 
a modern AMD system the "BIOS" download from a vendor includes the 
AGESA, which is responsible for initializing the CPU. CPUs are simply 
more complex, so there are more bits involved with turning them on then 
there were in the old days. (At least for PCs--large systems in the old 
days had dedicated small computers to initialize the big computer; e.g., 
Cray systems used a sun workstation to manage initializiation. We've 
simply managed to miniaturize the small computer.)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212559

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Jo, 08 aug 19, 09:20:29, The Wanderer wrote:
> 
> As far as I'm aware, there are significantly more projects out there to
> produce free motherboard firmware (BIOS / UEFI images) than there are to
> produce free firmware for any of those other things.

One has to start somewhere and the BIOS seems like a logical choice to 
me.

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212444

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256



On 8/8/19 11:06 pm, Shahryar Afifi wrote:
> Thank you for this acknowledgment. Currently I have X61 with
> Middleton BIOS that claims to be free. Is that also not the case?

You can have a free BIOS, "Core boot, or similar?" ... but the CPU
itself has it's own non-free microcode.  Again, the display will have
it's own code, you might drive that display with free software, but
the display won't work fully and properly for protected content if it
doesn't validate the display as being compliant; heck even the display
cable can be a problem.

Again, if you want total free, then it isn't going to be easy to
achieve and it would be impossible with Intel CPUs.... unless you
don't consider the built in microcode to be a problem.  However, if
you do have an Intel CPU, then you almost certainly want the latest
microcode unless you don't trust it -- it may add more spyware or it
may fix security issues or both.... you will probably never know.

Cheers
A.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iHUEAREIAB0WIQTJAoMHtC6YydLfjUOoFmvLt+/i+wUCXUw19AAKCRCoFmvLt+/i
+xHbAP4gQatf0HhebBuFL99pPjgTishWOEiTGBxETXRCRbF2ywD9H+DZGQVnA00g
bxmvN5+La1l/ZsJrCeat+pbLiOtVUt4=
=lC0I
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212468

Shahryar Afifi wrote:
> Currently I have X61 with Middleton BIOS that claims to be free. Is
> that also not the case?

We are talking about the microcode that is stored inside the cpu, not
the BIOS which is x86 code stored in NVRAM on the motherboard.  In Intel
64 bit cpus this currently includes an entire operating system.  It can
completely bypass Linux without you even knowing that it is there.  Very
useful for large organizations with thousands of machines that they
need to centrally administer, but...
-- 
John Hasler 
jhasler@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212484

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Hi,

On 9/8/19 6:59 am, John Hasler wrote:
> Shahryar Afifi wrote:
>> Currently I have X61 with Middleton BIOS that claims to be free.
>> Is that also not the case?
> 
> We are talking about the microcode that is stored inside the cpu,
> not the BIOS which is x86 code stored in NVRAM on the motherboard.
> In Intel 64 bit cpus this currently includes an entire operating
> system.  It can completely bypass Linux without you even knowing
> that it is there.  Very useful for large organizations with
> thousands of machines that they need to centrally administer,
> but...

AIUI, when the machine boots, the BIOS loads the CPU microcode on
machine startup *before* Linux (or any other OS for that matter) boot
processes take over.  That is, every time the machine is booted, from
cold at least, the CPU microcode is updated from an area within the BIOS
.

If you have a newer microcode, then that /might/ be applied at the OS
level at some point.

Cheers
A.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iHUEAREIAB0WIQTJAoMHtC6YydLfjUOoFmvLt+/i+wUCXU0DPQAKCRCoFmvLt+/i
+8TMAP4xVQx0IPg4k3UHAcyHc8AaSKnOZTwaP677Wd5Xxa+6cwEAtxAopo7fzsJU
D0uXVWPk2Xp+01ucq3Jc3s5x3ffR3AU=
=wa3g
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212421

 Shahryar Afifi writes:
> Very well said. If debian free is not using amd64 microcode, so what
> kernel module runs my cpu as 64bit?

That microcode package contains bug fixes and updates for the microcode
that the manufacturer shipped the cpu with.  The cpu will run without it
but the spyware coded into it[1] might not work right.

[1] Or maybe there isn't any and they are really just fixing bugs that
could be security risks.  Or maybe both.
-- 
John Hasler 
jhasler@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#212441

On Thu, 08 Aug 2019 06:22:41 -0500
John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> wrote:

>  Shahryar Afifi writes:
> > Very well said. If debian free is not using amd64 microcode, so what
> > kernel module runs my cpu as 64bit?
> 
> That microcode package contains bug fixes and updates for the microcode
> that the manufacturer shipped the cpu with.  The cpu will run without it
> but the spyware coded into it[1] might not work right.
> 
> [1] Or maybe there isn't any and they are really just fixing bugs that
> could be security risks.  Or maybe both.

I understand that you're being somewhat facetious, but it should be
understood that updating microcode should be taken seriously, according
to Debian developer and linux microcode expert Henrique de Maraes
Holschuh:

> Intel® 64 and IA-32 processors (x86_64 and i686 processors) are capable of
> field-upgrading their control program (microcode) as well as parameters
> for other on-chip subsystems (power management, interconnects, etc).
> These microcode updates correct processor errata, and are important for
> safe, stable and correct system operation.
> 
> While most of the microcode updates fix problems that happen extremely
> rarely, they also fix high-profile, high-hitting issues.  There are enough
> microcode updates fixing processor errata that would cause system lockup,
> memory corruption, or unpredictable system behavior, to warrant taking
> firmware updates and microcode updates seriously.

https://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs/non-free/i/intel-microcode/unstable_README.Debian

Celejar

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web