Now if only there were a PCI ADSL2+ modem that was a real network interface and not another crappy, exploitable, buffer bloat infested, traffic intercepting cesspool (but embedded on a PCI card)...
Any DSL modem is going to be a proprietary cesspool of who knows what - putting that on a trusted PCI bus seems like the exact wrong thing to do.
I was just looking into ADSL2+ routers supported by OpenWRT and concluded it wasn't worth the bother. Just get any old proprietary ADSL2+ modem, set it to bridge mode, and treat its ethernet as the actual demarc point. Better galvanic isolation, too.
One problem there is that you lose all queue management and it seems they all do awful things. Many of them also randomly intercept and tamper with tcp connections even while not natting.
Yes, it's less than ideal. But I don't think you're ever going to find a nice, proper, trustable device. Communications gear is basically just complex software (DSP and the like). The parts count will be minimized to keep costs down, so the necessarily-proprietary parts get mingled with the needlessly-proprietary ones. Redeveloping those blobs as free software is certainly possible, but it will always lag behind the proprietary version. IMHO, that effort is better spent on working around the brokenness of such devices - maintain your own txqueue at a slightly slower rate than the modem, etc.
(My thinking on the "ideal cellphone" is the same - physically separate the baseband from the personal computer, with an IP-only interface (eg Wifi) between them.)
FWIW, I haven't noticed any packet mangling from my ADSL2+ modem in bridge mode, but I haven't looked very hard either.
Eh? Any laptop or wifi-only tablet would do, so I don't see why you're implying there's a shortage?
I've been meaning to enumerate the possibilities of things with long battery life that will ideally run normal GNU/Linux with a chorded keyboard for input. If that works out successfully, then a smart watch for notifications would be the logical next step.
Ah sorry, good point. I had other requirements in mind that made me think I would end up with a larger device (battery life, un-tablety to hopefully run GNU as a base), and forgot about those when writing my comment.
Not that I really want something that won't fit in my pocket, so thanks for your suggestions of things to look into :>
Although a device with a baseband (but antenna removed) could even be a decent starting point. Lacking a network channel, it would be basically equivalent security to a desktop CPU (that's an uncomfortable truth).
Well, I'll add a disclaimer that my comment was from a rough theoretical perspective. To successfully "remove the antenna", you're going to have to make sure communications don't continue to function on any remaining parasitic antenna - I wouldn't be surprised if removing just the obvious antenna still left you with a phone that worked in 80% of places. I don't know enough about cellphone chipsets to know if the mixer/external amp are integrated, or are still discrete things that can be removed. But you'd have to investigate these details on a specific model of phone and then measure the its actual emissions before you could have something even approaching a "guide".
Hm, are you sure? It has a jumper to change it to "PCI" instead of "LAN", which I guess would expose directly a PPP interface, but I can't seem to find any documentation on that feature.
