Well I hope that they could if he wanted to be a part of the team, would get hired. I don’t know for sure one way or the other, but it would be awesome to have coreboot be an option for this in the future. Same with intel me being disabled. I hadn’t known there were switches to disable webcam and microphone. I still though would like at least the webcam to be blocked off by default. Call me paranoid if you want, but I prefer it that way, even if I need to put some taped type thing there to block it.
As a last note, I prefer ath9k wifi cards, but I don’t think that will be a possibility in this, at least the foreseeable future if nothing else. I could be wrong about that, but yeah, if this is the case, I will probably prefer to do it a different way lol. I wonder how fast newer intel processors can compile a web browser compared to something very outdated like ivy bridge lol, including quad core. This is one reason I have some interest if nothing else.
You seem to be right, I found at least one website that sells them.
I looked to see what I might need for the DIY, seems I am looking at 1K even for the 11th gen processor version. No point yet tho, no coreboot support yet lol.
Tangentially related: Since Pluton has been mentioned a few times in this thread, I just want to point out that Zen4 Threadripper actually lacks Pluton (supposedly Zen4 Epyc lacks it as well considering they use the same silicon):
(yes I am aware that, in terms of form-factor, Threadripper is quite literally the exact opposite of laptops)
This seems to suggest that Pluton may only be included on parts with a primarily Windows focus, which still makes me wonder if a theoretical Steam Deck 2 (not Steam Deck OLED) would similarly lack Pluton hardwae (not just disabled in firmware) and if other companies, e.g. Framework, would be able to use the same chip for their own products or if Valve would have an exclusivity agreement.
(it’s worth noting that the current Steam Deck chip supposedly was a generic design that AMD made that ended up not being used by any OEMs, at which point it’s rumored that Valve decided to step in and use it for cheap)
An upcoming talk could interest those following the coreboot development for the Framework laptops. Felix Singer will present a “corebooting Framework” status update at the Dasharo Developers vPub 0x9.
In his talk, Felix will discuss the current state of coreboot on the Framework laptop, addressing the challenges encountered and the progress made so far. He’ll also touch on the next steps for the project, including the release and validation process, and mention potential plans for official support.
This talk is a good opportunity for anyone interested in the technical details of coreboot on the Framework laptop and those who have been tracking its development. It’s a chance to hear directly from someone deeply involved in the project.
Felix’s insights could be quite informative for those keen on open-source firmware and the evolution of the Framework laptop. He also mentioned to me there is a chance that Framework Team members will join the discussion, so maybe we can get something first-hand.
Sorry for the noise, but I got a message from Felix this morning that he will not be able to give his talk on Thursday because he is sick. I will try to reach out to the Framework Team - maybe someone can appear during the meeting and let the community know about the progress and plans.
Anyone, can you watch the coreboot x Framework presentation in real-time and share the summary later on this thread in case the presentation is not recorded?
Hi! I’ve been scrolling through the forums for a while now, and have been wondering about Coreboot. There’s a wiki on this already, and I was wondering if there was any more information for it. From what I can find, the problem is Intel BootGuard, blocking access to information needed to port it, although 3 people got laptops with it disabled. This post shows that the Framework Team at least was considering releasing something like this publicly, it’s been 2 years since. I’m highly interested in setting this up, and have been wondering whether the situation has changed. Now we have an AMD Framework laptop, which I am unaware of having an equivalent to BootGuard, though I could be wrong. What’s more, the Embedded Controller was open sourced, which while I am not fully sure of the porting process and not sure of what’s needed to be checked, might be a useful addition since this idea last got a large amount of attention. I don’t know all there is to know about this subject, far from it, but it’s definitely a cool thing to learn and if there’s a visible path forward for this that can involve the community contributing code, I’d be glad to help.
It sounds like there has been progress recently. Though we don’t know the exact status, as the talk where we were going to hear more about it didn’t happen due to the dev getting sick.
What @MJ1 said and those 3 apparently got theirs bricked while trying to port coreboot.
of which 1 is known who had it (and tweeted about requiring hardware flashing, send it back to framework I think.)
I believe this Felix Singer person got his hands (by official means) on one of those “bricked” boards and asked basicly anyone, but FW send the required bios to unbrick it using their hardware flasher. and from there, I dunno, but we think it might be coreboot related.
I am hardly a fanboy of amd like some are, but this being said, I learned from some people looking at the platform security processor that it might not be a remote backdoor after all. I also learned that supposedly, amd is being increasingly worked on for corebooting purposes. I wonder if coreboot on framework could end up happening via amd instead of intel. Just a thought!
I don’t really care about either x86 version much, it would be nice to have open source alternatives take over the market like Libre-Soc best case, microwatt next best or Risc-V. But yeah that’s a while away for now I think.
