Mobile-gadget makers are starting to take advantage of software-defined radio, a new technology allowing a single device to receive signals from multiple sources, including TV stations and cell phone networks. But a new federal rule set to take effect Friday could mean that radios built on 'open-source elements' may encounter a more sluggish path to market - or, in the worst case scenario, be shut out altogether. U.S. regulators, it seems, believe the inherently public nature of open-source code makes it more vulnerable to hackers, leaving 'a high burden to demonstrate that it is sufficiently secure'.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-02-15
You do raise an excellent point. SDRs are different from PCs and other embedded systems. It would make no sense to discourage open source in mobile phones for instance, but it is different for SDRs where the frequeny range of the tranceivers is under the control of the software (or firmware), making it easy for potential abuse.
In a modern cellphone, the frequency range and power level of the transceiver is under control of software.
The reason why the FCC isn't as paranoid about cellphones as it is about cognitive radio is that current cellphone designs are all dual processor, with a 'modem' processor that runs software proprietary to the radio vendor and an 'application' processor that runs software from the cellphone developer. Even on an open design like openmoko, the modem processor runs software that isn't open.
But however, open source in the case of SDRs can help to reduce developement costs thus making the devices cheaper and also help foster good standards (SDR ICs that are easy to program and debug and with good third party tools for doing so, for example),just as in any other embedded system industry.
Of all the myths that surround open source software, that of reduction of development costs is the most annoying. I am now working on my fourth development project in ten years that uses OSS, and am familiar with many others. In none of them has there been an overall reduction in development cost as a result of using OSS.
Likewise, the attitude that "there's more than one way to do it" coupled with the willingness of open source developers to start over rather than try to get along with other open source developers is a significant hindrance to any tendency of OSS to increase standardization within an industry.
Member since:
2007-04-06
You do raise an excellent point. SDRs are different from PCs and other embedded systems. It would make no sense to discourage open source in mobile phones for instance, but it is different for SDRs where the frequeny range of the tranceivers is under the control of the software (or firmware), making it easy for potential abuse.
But however, open source in the case of SDRs can help to reduce developement costs thus making the devices cheaper and also help foster good standards (SDR ICs that are easy to program and debug and with good third party tools for doing so, for example),just as in any other embedded system industry. And it is possible to prevent modified versions of the opensource SDR software to run on the device (even though the FSF doesn't like it). AMD's PIC computer* and the TIVO DVR completely prevent modified (or entirely new) versions of the source code to run on them.
This 'locking down' of devices is disallowed under the new GPL3 but perfectly possible under other open source licenses (including the GPL 2, google for Tivoisation for more info). Hence usage of open source only stands to benefit all the parties involved. What should be prevented, is the ability to modify the device range.
Moreover usage of strong digital encryption and a spread spectrum system, as well as other techniques should be carried out to prevent eavsdropping and interference.
* AMD's Personal Internet Communicator (PIC) did not run open source software. Hackers have tried their best to run linux on it, but to no avail (as I last checked). The PIC is discontinued now.