Re: Feds snub open source for 'smart' radios

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Peter Swire <peter () peterswire net>
Date: July 24, 2007 2:25:29 PM EDT
To: dave () farber net
Subject: RE: [IP] Re: Feds snub open source for 'smart' radios

Dave:

John Shoch does quote the relevant part of the FCC document:

"manufacturers should not
intentionally make the distinctive elements that implement that
manufacturer's particular security measures in a software defined radio
public, if doing so would increase the risk that these security
measures could be defeated or otherwise circumvented to allow operation
of the radio in a manner that violates the Commission's rules."

That's exactly the point.  The FCC is assuming "security through  
obscurity" is more secure than an open source approach to a software  
defined radio.  I'm not aware of any basis for that conclusion.  For  
software that is subject to repeated testing/probing by the public,  
as we have here, the literature concludes that openness is more  
likely to result in better security.  http://ssrn.com/abstract=531782

Peter

Prof. Peter Swire
C. William O'Neill Professor of Law
Moritz College of Law of the
Ohio State University
Senior Fellow, Center for American Progress
(240) 994-4142, www.peterswire.net


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [IP] Re:   Feds snub open source for 'smart' radios
From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Tue, July 24, 2007 12:57 pm
To: ip () v2 listbox com



Begin forwarded message:

From: John Shoch <shoch () alloyventures com>
Date: July 24, 2007 11:17:38 AM EDT
To: dave () farber net,

-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com