Re: Non-x86
ropers wrote: > On 24/10/2007, Lars NoodC)n <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Seriously, what (affordable) non-x86 hardware options are available, >> especially those without AMT or AMT-like backdoors? >> >> http://softwarecommunity.intel.com/articles/eng/1148.htm >> http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20050301net.htm >> http://www.intel.com/cd/ids/developer/asmo-na/eng/320959.htm >> >> Or is workstation and server hardware covered by CALEA now, too? > > Relevancy links: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Active_Management_Technology > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Assistance_for_Law_Enforcement_Act I'm not sure there is a context in which Wikipedia is ever relevant: it is not now nor has ever been an authoritative source. (Look up authoritative). Lately it's become the playground for PR teams and even politicians' agendas, further reducing its accuracy. In the specific context of CALEA, the AMT wikipedia page as of Fri Oct 26 07:45:59 GMT 2007, does not contain any references to CALEA, but do contain the links I provided above. The CALEA page points to links easily found with search engines. Neither page points to non-x86 hardware options. The two points of all that grousing are 1) it's fine not to know the answer, just don't pretend to know by pointing to Google or Wikipedia, and 2) Wikipedia is not authoritative, nor in many controversial specialized cases, reliable. The question remains, what (affordable) non-x86 hardware options are available? A new question is added, are AMT-like rootkits required in all architectures, and further, is it required in closed source software? I seem to recall an anti-trust trial in the US where one company's executives said under oath something tot the effect that it would be their "patriotic duty" to put back doors into their systems if called on to do so. Regards, -Lars
Re: Non-x86
2007/10/26, Lars Noodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I'm not sure there is a context in which Wikipedia is ever relevant: it It's only as relevant as YOU help make it. Shut up and improve it. Best Martin
Re: Non-x86
On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 01:39:56PM +0200, Martin Schr?der wrote: > 2007/10/26, Lars Noodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > I'm not sure there is a context in which Wikipedia is ever relevant: it > > It's only as relevant as YOU help make it. > > Shut up and improve it. why don't you shuddup? cu -- paranoic mickey (my employers have changed but, the name has remained)
Re: Non-x86
On 10/26/07, Lars Noodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In the specific context of CALEA, the AMT wikipedia page as of Fri Oct > 26 07:45:59 GMT 2007, does not contain any references to CALEA, but do > contain the links I provided above. The CALEA page points to links > easily found with search engines. so in the specific context of CALEA, why don't you explain how AMT is related?
Re: Non-x86
2007/10/26, Lars Noodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Where are the choices for non-x86? The only remaining alternative is Sparc. Everything else is either old (macppc) or expensive & unsupported (IA64). Best Martin
Re: Non-x86
Ted Unangst wrote: > On 10/26/07, Lars NoodC)n <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> In the specific context of CALEA, the AMT wikipedia page as of Fri Oct >> 26 07:45:59 GMT 2007, does not contain any references to CALEA, but do >> contain the links I provided above. The CALEA page points to links >> easily found with search engines. > > so in the specific context of CALEA, why don't you explain how AMT is related? > CALEA requires wiretapping capabilities in networking hardware. You know that. AMT provides wiretapping capabilities, though not by name. What is unclear is how much those CALEA requirements extend to more generic computing platforms and even operating systems. AMT, from Intel's own pages, seems for all practical purposes a hard-coded rootkit useful for surveillance, among other things. Thus the connection to CALEA. So, are backdoors like AMT required for all motherboards now? If so, what are the details? If not, what non-x86 options are available for regular workstations and servers. There's a shitload available for embedded devices and such. Where are the choices for non-x86? -Lars
Re: Non-x86
> > Where are the choices for non-x86? > > The only remaining alternative is Sparc. Everything else is either old > (macppc) or expensive & unsupported (IA64). If anyone is looking for a non-x86 laptop, there aren't many choices. Is there any information about OpenBSD on the following Sparc laptop? http://www.tadpolecomputer.com/products/notebooks/viper.asp
Re: Non-x86
On 10/26/07, Matthew Szudzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Where are the choices for non-x86? > > > > The only remaining alternative is Sparc. Everything else is either old > > (macppc) or expensive & unsupported (IA64). > > If anyone is looking for a non-x86 laptop, there aren't many choices. Is > there any information about OpenBSD on the following Sparc laptop? > > http://www.tadpolecomputer.com/products/notebooks/viper.asp > > ppc ibooks are pretty cheap, but not very upgradeable. You can get most for about $200 USD. ppc powerbooks are nice (cardbus slots, gigabit, better video cards), but more costly. You can also upgrade the cpu in old powerbooks and put big sticks of ram in them (also costly)
Re: Non-x86
On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 09:59:43AM -0400, Jeff Quast wrote: > On 10/26/07, Matthew Szudzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Where are the choices for non-x86? > > > > > > The only remaining alternative is Sparc. Everything else is either old > > > (macppc) or expensive & unsupported (IA64). > > > > If anyone is looking for a non-x86 laptop, there aren't many choices. Is > > there any information about OpenBSD on the following Sparc laptop? > > > > http://www.tadpolecomputer.com/products/notebooks/viper.asp > > > > > > ppc ibooks are pretty cheap, but not very upgradeable. You can get > most for about $200 USD. > > ppc powerbooks are nice (cardbus slots, gigabit, better video cards), > but more costly. You can also upgrade the cpu in old powerbooks and > put big sticks of ram in them (also costly) > Perhaps some day there will be a port for the IBM Power arch. Not that I can do diddly about it. Doug.
Re: Non-x86
Martin SchrC6der wrote: > 2007/10/26, Lars Noodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> Where are the choices for non-x86? > > The only remaining alternative is Sparc. Everything else is either old > (macppc) or expensive & unsupported (IA64). It's too bad that Apple discontinued their PPC. It was an acceptable price, especially the mac mini. >From the feedback I'm getting here it seems that the new hardware options are expensive. http://www.terrasoftsolutions.com/products/sony/ http://www.terrasoftsolutions.com/products/mercury/ http://www.tadpole.com/products/notebooks/viper.asp http://www.sun.com/servers/index.jsp?tab=2 http://www.sun.com/desktop/index.jsp?tab=0&stab=2 What else should be on the list? Regards, -Lars
Re: Non-x86
On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 06:53:38PM +0200, Lars Nood??n wrote: > Martin SchrC6der wrote: > > 2007/10/26, Lars Noodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> Where are the choices for non-x86? > > > > The only remaining alternative is Sparc. Everything else is either old > > (macppc) or expensive & unsupported (IA64). > > It's too bad that Apple discontinued their PPC. It was an acceptable > price, especially the mac mini. > > >From the feedback I'm getting here it seems that the new hardware > options are expensive. > What else should be on the list? It would be nice if IBM's Power stuff was, even if its older pSeries like the 7025 or 7026 yet alone anything newer. I don't know what would be involved in getting OpenBSD ported to them. Doug.
Re: Non-x86
> >> Where are the choices for non-x86? > > > > The only remaining alternative is Sparc. Everything else is either old > > (macppc) or expensive & unsupported (IA64). I agree that sparc64 is currently the best alternative to the x86 architecture in i386 and amd64. For me, the biggest obstacles to buying a sparc64 machine are: * sparc64 machines the are significantly more expensive than their x86 counterparts. * There is no binary emulator that would allow me to run proprietary software like Mathematica on sparc64. (In contrast, I can run Mathematica on i386 with the Linux binary emulator.) NetBSD has a Solaris binary emulator for sparc64, so with a little work it might be possible to remove this second obstacle.
non-x86-based hardware for OBSD?
I'm looking at the recent article on Soekris and very favorably impressed. "Setting up a Soekris 5501 with OpenBSD 4.2" 24 Sep 2007 http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20070924004901 The setup seems almost perfect, except that the AMD Geode seems to be x86-based. What corresponding non-x86 hardware options are common, recommended, or even available ? Regards, -Lars
Re: non-x86-based hardware for OBSD?
VIA, Intel lo-comsumption, are X86-based. You should go into the ARM world to get something like that, and you will be disapointed, as it is much much harder to find something with 4 network connectors, serial, flash, pci, mini-pci connector, due to the lack of products & manufacturers. You may want to check the website of the manufacturers mentionned on epiacenter website (http://www.epiacenter.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=39), some of them have a very broad range of product, more than you can easily find on the net. Regards, On 9/25/07, Lars Noodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm looking at the recent article on Soekris and very favorably impressed. > > "Setting up a Soekris 5501 with OpenBSD 4.2" 24 Sep 2007 > http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20070924004901 > > The setup seems almost perfect, except that the AMD Geode seems to be > x86-based. > > What corresponding non-x86 hardware options are common, recommended, or > even available ? > > Regards, > -Lars
Re: non-x86-based hardware for OBSD?
On 9/25/07, Lars NoodC)n <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm looking at the recent article on Soekris and very favorably impressed. > > "Setting up a Soekris 5501 with OpenBSD 4.2" 24 Sep 2007 > http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20070924004901 > > The setup seems almost perfect, except that the AMD Geode seems to be > x86-based. > > What corresponding non-x86 hardware options are common, recommended, or > even available ? > > Regards, > -Lars > > Do you have any special reasons for not using x86-based hardware? BR dunceor
Re: non-x86-based hardware for OBSD?
nicodache wrote: > ... > You should go into the ARM world to get something like that, and you > will be disapointed, as it is much much harder to find something with > 4 network connectors, serial, flash, pci, mini-pci connector, due to > the lack of products & manufacturers. Yes. I know. Hence my query to the list. > ... on epiacenter website ... I find only x86-based units there: celeron, amd geode, pentium, c3, eden, TM8600, etc. One ARM on the list, though. But isn't ARM now under Intel, maker of AMT? There has got to be non-x86 units out there, SBC or other, running Cell or Freescale or anything else. Regards, -Lars
Re: non-x86-based hardware for OBSD?
On 9/25/07, Lars NoodC)n <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > nicodache wrote: > > ... > > You should go into the ARM world to get something like that, and you > > will be disapointed, as it is much much harder to find something with > > 4 network connectors, serial, flash, pci, mini-pci connector, due to > > the lack of products & manufacturers. > > Yes. I know. Hence my query to the list. > > > ... on epiacenter website ... > > I find only x86-based units there: celeron, amd geode, pentium, c3, > eden, TM8600, etc. > > One ARM on the list, though. But isn't ARM now under Intel, maker of AMT? > > There has got to be non-x86 units out there, SBC or other, running Cell > or Freescale or anything else. > > Regards, > -Lars > > What is AMT? Well ARM is not under Intel, Intel does ARM-processors just like several others do (Atmel, TI, Phillips etc). ARM only licence their technology and their designs and let others produce it. The question is what are your goal with the system? Route, small file server, entertainment box? Please explain your demands and purpose with the system and people can help and identify what hw that could suite. Br Dunceor
Re: non-x86-based hardware for OBSD?
I think AxiomTek has what you're looking for. And if it doesn't, then either there is no such thing as you search, or it's well hidden. regards, On 9/25/07, Lars Noodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > nicodache wrote: > > ... > > You should go into the ARM world to get something like that, and you > > will be disapointed, as it is much much harder to find something with > > 4 network connectors, serial, flash, pci, mini-pci connector, due to > > the lack of products & manufacturers. > > Yes. I know. Hence my query to the list. > > > ... on epiacenter website ... > > I find only x86-based units there: celeron, amd geode, pentium, c3, > eden, TM8600, etc. > > One ARM on the list, though. But isn't ARM now under Intel, maker of AMT? > > There has got to be non-x86 units out there, SBC or other, running Cell > or Freescale or anything else. > > Regards, > -Lars
Re: non-x86-based hardware for OBSD?
Karl SjC6dahl - dunceor wrote: > What is AMT? http://www.intel.com/technology/platform-technology/intel-amt/index.htm aka "rootkit for everybody" http://strombergson.com/kryptoblog/?p=311 > Well ARM is not under Intel, Intel does ARM-processors just like > several others do (Atmel, TI, Phillips etc). ARM only licence their > technology and their designs and let others produce it. Ok. However, the devil is in the details. > The question is what are your goal with the system? ... Route / filter as the Soekris boxes are often used. -Lars
Re: non-x86-based hardware for OBSD?
On 2007/09/25 15:19, Lars Noodin wrote: > nicodache wrote: > > ... > > You should go into the ARM world to get something like that, and you > > will be disapointed, as it is much much harder to find something with > > 4 network connectors, serial, flash, pci, mini-pci connector, due to > > the lack of products & manufacturers. > > Yes. I know. Hence my query to the list. Thecus N2100 has two ethernet, minipci, USB, serial. But although it's low power, it's quite noisy (most of my fast arch boxes are *far* quieter). Maybe it would be ok with a SATA<>CF bridge and the fan removed...but then it really could use another ethernet port or two. And it would be nice if it had something like the "+++ reset" / "+++ power" feature that the net5501 has. > > ... on epiacenter website ... > > I find only x86-based units there: celeron, amd geode, pentium, c3, > eden, TM8600, etc. I just noticed Commell LV-681 (socket S1 amd64; ati chipset)... it looks quite expensive, though, and at least where I live, only a limited part of their product range seems to be available (VIA/Intel CPU mini-itx boards mostly - BVM list some of the others but weren't capable of answering email last time I tried). > One ARM on the list, though. But isn't ARM now under Intel, maker of AMT? Not all Intel CPUs are i386-compatible, of course... > There has got to be non-x86 units out there, SBC or other, running Cell > or Freescale or anything else. Freescale is a company, not a CPU architecture - looks like they have designs using powerpc, arm, etc.
Re: non-x86-based hardware for OBSD?
Lars Noodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There has got to be non-x86 units out there, SBC or other, running Cell > or Freescale or anything else. If you look hard enough, I think you can find ARM/MIPS/PowerPC based single-board computers vaguely comparable to the Soekris range. Heck, just look at what NetBSD and Wasabi support. However, OpenBSD won't run there out of the box, it'll each time require a new port to this platform. -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: non-x86-based hardware for OBSD?
On 9/25/07, Lars Noodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm looking at the recent article on Soekris and very favorably impressed. > >"Setting up a Soekris 5501 with OpenBSD 4.2" 24 Sep 2007 >http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20070924004901 > > The setup seems almost perfect, except that the AMD Geode seems to be > x86-based. indeed. meaning it uses the same compiler and kernel as the most widely tested port of openbsd. > What corresponding non-x86 hardware options are common, recommended, or > even available ? why would you want such a thing?
Non-x86 (was: About Xen: maybe a reiterative question but ..)
Theo de Raadt wrote: > x86 virtualization is about basically placing another nearly full > kernel, full of new bugs, on top of a nasty x86 architecture which > barely has correct page protection. He probably meant psychological security, or job security. > ... Then running your operating > system on the other side of this brand new pile of shit. Seriously, what (affordable) non-x86 hardware options are available, especially those without AMT or AMT-like backdoors? http://softwarecommunity.intel.com/articles/eng/1148.htm http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20050301net.htm http://www.intel.com/cd/ids/developer/asmo-na/eng/320959.htm Or is workstation and server hardware covered by CALEA now, too? -Lars
Re: Non-x86 (was: About Xen: maybe a reiterative question but ..)
On 24/10/2007, Lars Noodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Seriously, what (affordable) non-x86 hardware options are available, > especially those without AMT or AMT-like backdoors? > > http://softwarecommunity.intel.com/articles/eng/1148.htm > http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20050301net.htm > http://www.intel.com/cd/ids/developer/asmo-na/eng/320959.htm > > Or is workstation and server hardware covered by CALEA now, too? Relevancy links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Active_Management_Technology http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Assistance_for_Law_Enforcement_Ac t
