EU plans to ban the sale of user-moddable radio frequency devices

[Heater]

The EU's plan to plans to ban the sale of user-moddable radio frequency devices could have bad consequences for the Raspberry Pi. Not to mention our use of electronics in general.

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/03/1 ... _tinkering

Time to start writing to your representitives.

[DougieLawson]

We can ignore that after March 29th.

European folks may need to lobby their MEPs.

[jamesh]

We can ignore that after March 29th.

European folks may need to lobby their MEPs.

Not if you want to sell in to the EU, admittedly a tiny insignificant market*, but a market nevertheless.





* Actually, a really big market.

[Gavinmc42]

I guess that bans Pi's too as the GPIO can be turned into a RF transmitter under software control.
I mess about with LoRa and change freqs under software control.
I even change WiFi bands to avoid the neighbours WiFi.
Lucky I'm not in the EU.

The Chinese do whatever they like with Router software.
Perhaps they have to open source that so the EU can peak at the code?

All those kids walkie talkies will be banned too, one fixed frequency only allowed.
BLE banned, including Microbits which are easy to hack into transmitters.
this sounds nearly as bad as paying for a license to watch free to air TV

[DougieLawson]

At least isn't not real legislation yet, unlike the incredibly, pathetic Australian encryption laws (which were wholeheartedly mocked at the RSA Conf). Those laws could ban HTTPS, GPG and VPNs (& more), if enacted to their full definition. Technically, online banking is outlawed in Oz.

The underlying problem is politicians are mostly 100% clueless on tech (always have been) and their advisers are only out to earn a quick buck for bad advice.

[hippy]

Time to start writing to your representitives.

I recommend taking some time to sit down and understand what the directive actually says and intends before grabbing the pitchforks and lighting torches. However, I guess this will turn into another scaremongering anti-EU bandwagon like 'link taxes' and 'copyright fears' did and 'bendy bananas' always has been. There's always someone anti-EU eager and ready to suggest the EU is doing something it isn't, to incite hysteria, to push their agenda.

The EU's intent is to stop people hacking their RF devices to use frequencies not authorised for use or outputting more power than allowed and the like. It will not stop anyone modifying equipment when they don't change the RF things they are not allowed to change.

It is just an extension of what we already have; that one is not legally allowed to attach an external antenna to a Pi, which one isn't, because that breaks compliance.

One can either take a view that what the EU is proposing is pretty reasonable and will have few practical consequence apart from affecting those who want to be doing what they shouldn't be doing anyway, or one can claim it's the end of the world and the sky is falling.

Bottom line is one can make a reasoned and argued decision or just jump on a bandwagon.

[epoch1970]

Technically, online banking is outlawed in Oz.

Reminds me of the SSL ban in France until the late 90's. We had to protect the Minitel "ecosystem" against that foreign Internet thing.
Just another setback among many...

I wouldn't be surprised that our politicians could take a position actually adverse to the development of cloud edge computing when the EU has obviously lost the cloud computing battle already. Let's see if reason prevails.

[hippy]

I guess that bans Pi's too as the GPIO can be turned into a RF transmitter under software control.

Worse it bans crystal oscillator modules. Because, with a wire attached, they can be switched on and off to produce a very effective radio transmitter. What the EU is proposing will mean the utter destruction of the electronics industry.

That's the kind of hysterical reductio ad absurdum nonsense which frequently accompanies whatever the EU does. And it appears to have only got worse now we seem to be living in an increasingly bizarre post-truth world.

[ejolson]

I guess that bans Pi's too as the GPIO can be turned into a RF transmitter under software control.

Worse it bans crystal oscillator modules. Because, with a wire attached, they can be switched on and off to produce a very effective radio transmitter. What the EU is proposing will mean the utter destruction of the electronics industry.

That's the kind of hysterical reductio ad absurdum nonsense which frequently accompanies whatever the EU does. And it appears to have only got worse now we seem to be living in an increasingly bizarre post-truth world.

I think the reason people post such absurd consequences, in my opinion, has nothing to do with the EU. Rather, the attempt is to show that just because open source makes it easier to modify software, there is really no difference in a WiFi module which can be modified by changing the software compared to an electronic device that can be modified using a soldering iron and wire. Since soldering irons and wire are not likely to be banned, there is no need to ban radio transmitters based on open source software.

What causes law abiding people to follow the law is not that the laws themselves are impossible to break, but that people choose not to break them. Creating legislation that outlaws certain kinds of open source software in an attempt to make WiFi regulations impossible to break only moves further away from auditable security. In particular, it doesn't make WiFi regulations impossible to break. Moreover, treating people who are not in prison as if they were, is likely to undermine public trust in the moral foundations of the laws which govern them. Lack of mutual trust between people and their governments seldom leads to something good.

While misguided WiFi regulation is unlikely to cause economic collapse or a revolution, why risk it?

[hippy]

Moreover, treating people who are not in prison as if they were, is likely to undermine public trust in the moral foundations of the laws which govern them.

That rather rests on whether the public believe those laws are acceptable or unreasonable. Views on that will differ depending on whether one wants to do whatever a law prohibits or not and also has a variety of cultural perspectives; the right of gun ownership is a particularly notable instance of that.

There will always be people who consider themselves unfairly criminalised because of some law or other but it doesn't necessarily mean they are. It depends on which position one considers it from and there is rarely a single perspective.

One of the things we don't seem to have got to grips with in the modern world is that different people have different perspectives and do have cultural differences, that how some would like things is not how others would.

There certainly are laws, rules and regulations, which can be argued to be unfair, but that has to be evidenced and argued as such, not just claimed. Just saying it's so doesn't make it so. But in this post-truth world it increasingly seems that it does.

[Heater]

The worry is that an over restrictive interpretation of such regulations could result in:

a) I can no longer buy wireless routers and such that i can modify the software of. That means no chance to use things like OpenWRT. No chance to use Free and Open source software on such devices.

That is detrimental to security.

To some extent it detrimental to my right to repair and hence the environment. When vendor updates cease there is nothing to do but add the device to a land fill.

b) I can no longer buy devices like Raspberry Pi equipped with WiFi, Bluetooth etc.

That is detrimental to a whole industry now.

c) More philosophically it further undermines the concept of ownership. If I can't hack on my things do I really own them?

Many will not know or care about any of the above. I do.

[jamesh]

Why does it prevent sale of the Raspberry Pi? Not seeing the link.

[Heater]

Don't some Raspberry Pi have WiFi on board?

Isn't it possible for the user to modify the software that drives the WiFi hardware on those Pi?

Why would the proposed regulation not apply to Pi?

[hippy]

The worry is that an over restrictive interpretation of such regulations could result in:

a) I can no longer buy wireless routers and such that i can modify the software of. That means no chance to use things like OpenWRT. No chance to use Free and Open source software on such devices.

b) I can no longer buy devices like Raspberry Pi equipped with WiFi, Bluetooth etc.

That is detrimental to a whole industry now.

Where is the evidence that it will, or even could, lead to any of these things, would be as detrimental as you say ?

Sure, there's a lot of people saying it could lead to such but I don't see any evidence presented. And by evidence I mean pointing to directive text and showing a clear chain leading to such outcomes.

The EU's copyright directive elicited similar scaremongering and also without much evidence. There were plenty saying 'what it means' but with no proof of such, usually without even a link to the directive text they were supposedly basing their claim upon. One of the oft repeated complaints was that the EU were actually imposing things which were "impossible" to achieve, would terminally end what we currently have.

That raises some obvious questions - Why would they do that ? Who would it benefit ? Why would they impose something "impossible" which it indeed would be if the interpretation of the directive by those complaining abut it were correct ? Could it not be that such an interpretation was wrong, did not reflect the directive's actual meaning and intent ?

I would suggest it's the same with any interpretation that this directive would make it impossible to buy a Raspberry Pi with Wi-Fi or Bluetooth, or buy anything similar.

It's like interpreting the UK's anti-terrorism legislation which references 'items likely to be useful to a terrorist' as banning A-Z maps, making mobile phones illegal, and similar. It's a misinterpretation, that reductio ad absurdum I mentioned.

It's easy to push conspiracy theories that the EU is some sort of New World Order determined to crush the people and working solely for the benefit of Big Business and to put money in the back pocket of George Soros and some supposed 'the establishment'. It's rather harder to prove they are anything but conspiracy theory.

This latest bandwagon looks to me much the same as the ones which have preceded it, but I am open to seeing the evidence if there is any.

[hippy]

Don't some Raspberry Pi have WiFi on board?

Isn't it possible for the user to modify the software that drives the WiFi hardware on those Pi?

Why would the proposed regulation not apply to Pi?

The onus is on those claiming it would to prove that it does and would have the effect claimed.

Without evidence of the impact claimed that is merely unfounded assertion, little more than scaremongering and concern trolling.

[Heater]

hippy,

The onus is on those claiming it would to prove that it does and would have the effect claimed.

I'm not sure what it is you want proof of. The issue at hand is Article 3(3)(i) of the EU Radio Equipment Directive. See link above. Where it clearly states:

"radio equipment supports certain features in order to ensure that software can only be loaded into the radio equipment where the compliance of the combination of the radio equipment and software has been demonstrated."

This is already law.

You have a point about "the effect claimed". Well, like all law it's open to interpretation by those enforcing it. For example:

a) What exactly is classified as "radio equipment"? Potentially anything with a radio transmitter. A Pi for example.

b) What exactly is meant by "certain features..."? Presumably that means some kind of lock down such that users cannot load any old software they like. The Pi clearly lacks any of that.

And so on.

Obviously it's not possible to "prove" that this law will have the effect claimed. It all depends on the interpretation and implementation. But it clearly is a possibility.

And that is the motivation for my posting this thread. I presume the Pi Foundation might like to make it's opinion on this known to the powers that be. Or why not Pi users themselves?

Without evidence of the impact claimed that is merely unfounded assertion, little more than scaremongering and concern trolling.

I don't want to be in the position of pointing to evidence of the impact claimed after the event, after devices have been locked down and things like the Pi removed from the shelves.

You can call it "scaremongering and concern trolling" if you like, I hardly know what that newspeak means. But I do have a concern, for sound reasons, and this is just a heads up about it.

[Andyroo]

Don't some Raspberry Pi have WiFi on board?

Isn't it possible for the user to modify the software that drives the WiFi hardware on those Pi?

Why would the proposed regulation not apply to Pi?

You could argue that every computer with built in WiFi and a loadable operating system falls under this.

Me - I’m more bothered where my food is going to come from as 70% of the families shopping is EU or further.

[hippy]

Obviously it's not possible to "prove" that this law will have the effect claimed. It all depends on the interpretation and implementation. But it clearly is a possibility.

I am not convinced it is a possibility, but even if it is; where is the evidence which suggests it would become an actuality ?

What are you basing your fears on other than "it might" ?

If we are going to worry over every "could happen", with no evidence that it ever will, we will have almost unlimited things to worry about.

As I said; scaremongering, concern trolling.

[Imperf3kt]

Obviously it's not possible to "prove" that this law will have the effect claimed. It all depends on the interpretation and implementation. But it clearly is a possibility.

I am not convinced it is a possibility, but even if it is; where is the evidence which suggests it would become an actuality ?

What are you basing your fears on other than "it might" ?

If we are going to worry over every "could happen", with no evidence that it ever will, we will have almost unlimited things to worry about.

As I said; scaremongering, concern trolling.

You seem to contradict yourself here regarding what "possibility" means. At first you claim the possibility does not exist, but then you claim the possibility exists with the chance of it becoming a reality being slim.
Which do you mean?

[hippy]

At first you claim the possibility does not exist, but then you claim the possibility exists with the chance of it becoming a reality being slim.
Which do you mean?

No; I am not claiming it does not exist, I am saying "I am not convinced it does exists, but if it does ..."

[Gavinmc42]

As I said; scaremongering, concern trolling.

Perhaps but here in Oz we have laws for enforcement devolving down local Councils.
Here they like to call themselves Local Government which is not recognised under our Constitution.

When a LG authorised officer makes a decision any of us are in non compliance we get fined or prosecuted.
Review process is at internal LG level or external Tribunal which is not Judicial.
So any little LG Napoleon can cause lots of trouble for people for "non compliance".

I'm not worried about the Laws, just the administration of so many little ones without the Rule of Law checks and balances.
Who decides that gadget is not being used legally?
Black vans with rotating RD antennas roaming the streets?

But most EU countries a have Administrative Laws Courts, not the stupid English Adversarial legal System we inherited.
The EU should be fine, inquistorial Judges will get to the bottom of things.
Here the admin law system is so bad now the States are making Bill of Human Rights Acts as we don't have a Federal one.

[ejolson]

As I said; scaremongering, concern trolling.

Perhaps but here in Ox we have laws for enforcement devolving down local Councils.

It sounds like in Ox there could be trouble. I also believe it is important that laws be clear.

Unfortunately, clarity requires being very specific and being very specific requires technical knowledge and people with technical knowledge often have more interesting things to do. For example, posting off-topic threads to the Raspberry Pi forum is notably more interesting than trying to create legislation that makes it physically impossible for people to violate WiFi radio rules.

[Gavinmc42]

Whoops, that's Oz.
Ox refers to the pollies who want to backdoor encryption so they can spy on us when we talk about them.
Double edged sword, LG councillors have been using encrypted apps to avoid the Corruption cops.

Governments are in trouble in most Democracies with their tiny little laws clogging up the legal system, even Elon is running away to Mars.
Brexit? The UK had a referendum to leave the EU, the people decided and voted.
The Government was supposed to do what the people say, not stuff up and now ask for another referendum?

Nope, this EU plan is just more stupid Gov spin that reinforces knowledgeable people's opinion that gov's do not know how to do good governance. RF can travel across borders, with no agreement with the UK, RPF can just ignore this EU plan?

I will jump off my soap box now and go back and play with my Pi's while Democracy crumbles outside.

[gkreidl]

"knowledgeable people" should first acquire some knowledge about what they are talking about. We are not talking about "EU plans" (just populist propaganda) but about a EU directive which has passed both the EU parliament and the EU Council (one vote per member state) in 2014: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2014/53/oj

An EU directive is not a law, but a frame work for national laws. Once it has passed both the EU parliament and the EU council (after a long and painstaking process involving thousands of people), all member nations have to adopt their national laws within a certain time frame (in this case until 2018) to match that frame work.

[hippy]

Brexit? The UK had a referendum to leave the EU, the people decided and voted.
The Government was supposed to do what the people say

No it wasn't. The UK has representative democracy not direct democracy, and parliament had decided the referendum would be purely advisory. Neither parliament nor the government were legally obliged to act or do anything based on the referendum result.

Decision making powers were never handed to the people. Parliament was quite explicit in ensuring they weren't.

As I said; we are living in a post-truth world and this is just one example of that. Just because it is said, or one chooses to believe it, it doesn't make it true.