Hacker News Reader

Comment by jorvi | Hacker News Reader

> I feel like a system should be usable immediately with little effort if it is to be enjoyed and properly useful.

More open source should think like this.

I’ve been aggressively trying to get OpenWRT to ship the images with WiFi on by default. At this point 99.99% of people are not leaving their network unsecured, and if for some reason you have to reset the router it becomes a plastic brick unless you have an Ethernet cable and an USB-to-ethernet adapter nearby.

Even suggestions of either creating a landing page that forces the user to set up security before allowing internet connectivity, or basing the WiFi password on the serial number (that is also on the back of any router) falls on deaf ears.

View on HN

> I’ve been aggressively trying to get OpenWRT to ship the images with WiFi on by default

With what password? Plenty of people won't configure things they don't have to and that's a huge security hole. I don't see the utility in this change frankly.

The comment you reply to both explains the utility and proposes ways of mitigating the "huge security hole".

So two clicks to turn on wifi that I can do from anywhere in my house is easier than digging my router out of my closet to write down and type in the serial number? This was supposed to be an idea that makes OpenWRT "usable immediately with little effort". This is not that.

I didn't see the part where they suggested to disable configuration over wired ethernet, or this was the only thing suggested. And yes, a lot of the time when people are setting up a router they have the router at hand.

> I didn't see the part where they suggested to disable configuration over wired ethernet

In case I wasn't clear, configuring it over wired Ethernet is exactly what I'm suggesting. This is a far more usable and secure default than default than wireless on with the password as some universal default or using the serial number.

> And yes, a lot of the time when people are setting up a router they have the router at hand.

While I have no doubt that this is true for home-grade firewall/NAT/wifi combo boxes in general, with very few exceptions OpenWRT is not a thing you get out of the box nor a thing "normal people" install.

The Venn diagram of "people who have chosen to install an alternate firmware on their home network appliance" and "people who don't have an ethernet capable device around at basically all times" can't have a lot of overlap.

The problem is not the fact of not having an Ethernet cable around, these days almost no laptop has an Ethernet port.

Which is a problem easily solved with a cheap USB ethernet dongle, and again while the general mainstream computing audience may or may not have those I think it's reasonable to assume that the average person who has chosen to install OpenWRT probably wishes laptops still came with ethernet ports and purchased an adapter immediately or soon after.

Maybe I'm wrong about that, but to me OpenWRT means geek audience, and geeks generally understand the value of a wired connection.

> So two clicks to turn on wifi

How would you communicate with the router without an ethernet connection to it?

Remember, WiFi is off by default.

At that point you're probably gonna have to do some serial or JTAG magic, which is gonna involve physically breaking open the router and soldering. So much for 'two clicks'.

> How would you communicate with the router without an ethernet connection to it?

Using the Ethernet port is exactly what I'm suggesting. This is far simpler than using the serial number as the wifi password, and more secure than a universal password.

Furthermore, there are legal liabilities involved with the wifi spectrum. Different countries reserve different bands in the spectrum and have different limits on transmission power. OpenWRT would have to provide different builds for different countries, maintain and validate this list and risk making costly legal mistakes here, or if there's some lowest common denominator, then risk giving OpenWRT getting a reputation for bad wifi.

No, best to let the user accept the liability of configuring their own router. The improvements in usability are marginal and the potential costs to OpenWRT are considerable.

> Furthermore, there are legal liabilities involved with the wifi spectrum.

OpenWRT is already ‘exposed’ (not really) to this risk, because as soon as you flip the radio to ‘on’, it’s just set to the default, not your specific region.

> The improvements in usability are marginal and the potential costs to OpenWRT are considerable.

And here we have it, the exact attitude the OP was talking about. Open source needs to become more considerate of its users.

> OpenWRT is already ‘exposed’ (not really) to this risk, because as soon as you flip the radio to ‘on’, it’s just set to the default, not your specific region.

The radio does not turn on unless you tell it to by saving your configuration. That's where the liability lies and that liability falls on the user at present. Placing it on the project is not acceptable.

> And here we have it, the exact attitude the OP was talking about. Open source needs to become more considerate of its users.

Inapplicable when the attitude exists for a good reason. Users can go elsewhere for free stuff if they're not happy with it.

> Placing it on the project is not acceptable.

The liability isn't on the project regardless.

> Users can go elsewhere for free stuff if they're not happy with it.

You're literally a 'why open source keeps sucking' quote machine.

> The liability isn't on the project regardless.

OK random person on the internet whose word I should accept on a subtle legal question. Tools that assist in violating the law are often themselves classed as illegal or carry liability for the producers. For instance, tools that assist in bypassing copyright protections, and tools that assist in breaking locks to name but a few.

Go ahead and quote me some rock solid precedent that would shield OpenWRT from any kind of liability if they wifi enabled distributed images with illegal configurations. A precedent that would apply in every jurisdiction mind you.

> You're literally a 'why open source keeps sucking' quote machine.

You made your case, the people actually doing the work clearly disagreed, so time to move on. Use your own time to make your perfect solution if it's that important to you, instead of demanding others do the same.

OpenWRT already provides the image builder, so all you technically need to do is host it: https://openwrt.org/docs/guide-user/additional-software/imag...

Best of luck with that.

> At this point 99.99% of people are not leaving their network unsecured…

99.99% of people are doing what? Sorry, the double negative above is confusing me.

I think they are suggesting that years of abuse hurled at the average user, coupled with legislation, have caused all new home networks to be secure, one way or the other.

There is regulation for that? I would be interested in finding out more.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com