Forum Discussion

sozoridge's avatar
sozoridge
Sophomore
8 years ago

access to router source code

I find that the HT2000w router I received today is running Linux.   Linux version 3.3.8 (bruce_ma@debian-wheezy-i386) (gcc version 4.6.3 20120201 (prerelease) (Linaro GCC 4.6-2012.02) ) #1 Fri May ...
  • C0RR0SIVE's avatar
    C0RR0SIVE
    8 years ago

    Last response...
    I could care less if there is a difference between the "modem" and "router", you will get the same response that Jezra did.

  • sozoridge's avatar
    sozoridge
    8 years ago

    Hi Liz

     

    I think your response may have been colored by the oddly aggressive posts by the other forum members.

     

    As you can see in that old quoted thread, it was asking a wholly different question unrelated to this one.

     

    The router of this modem *is* running Linux with Busybox.  Both of which are under the GPL v2 license.  It is not a question of what OS the modem's router is running.  That is already clearly available from the modem's syslog as I quoted in the original post.

     

    For your reference:

     

    https://busybox.net/license.html#enforce

    https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/kernel-enforcement-statement.html

     

    Please do pass this on up your support channels.

     

    Thank you.

     

GabeU's avatar
GabeU
Distinguished Professor IV

Good luck with that.  There's no way they're going to give you access to the source code of the software used in the modem, nor should they.  The last thing they need is people messing around with it.  

Gwalk900's avatar
Gwalk900
Honorary Alumnus
8 years ago

Yup, that's all we need. Someone mucking up the modem firmware

 

 

  • GabeU's avatar
    GabeU
    Distinguished Professor IV
    8 years ago
    Gwalk900 wrote:

    Yup, that's all we need. Someone mucking up the modem firmware 

    I can just imagine what would happen. 

     

    And, though I'm not at all versed in Linux's licensing terms and whatnot, I have no doubt that there is some reason that the aforementioned rule doesn't fit or apply, and that they aren't required to divugle such source code.  

     

    Again...I can just imagine.  It'd be an absolute nightmare.