Some questions I come to think of
1. Why ESP32 made it closed? 2. What does the MAC layer in the OSI model make it so important to either make this closed/open source ?
From the article: "security auditability", possibility for features not supported, make research into Wi-Fi networks with lots of nodes more affordable.
E.g. ESP32 is proprietary, but it doesn’t limit the connection to certain routers, but could it be made to be?
2. Manipulating RF registers could cause the device to operate outside of regulatory parameters, perhaps invalidating FCC certification for the whole device. By not disclosing how to use MAC directly, they can claim they did their best to prevent device from misbehaving.
Nice work by the presenters here, it's a good idea and might help the community, but the current state is not the result of Espressif trying to be jerks.
There is perhaps a 50/50 effort split between firmware and hardware design. Open source the firmware and suddenly an upstart competitor has only half the cost to market, and therefore could undercut you in price.
better interfacing and integration as a wifi chip on SBCs like raspberry pi, potentially allowing faster rates and lower latencies on SPI or I2c buses
better security and possibly handling further standards than the espressif allows.
for example, you may implement wpa3 or wpa4 (if it comes out at some point) without needing to wait for espressif to implement and release themselves. plus, they may never have the incentives to do so if a newer chip (esp64?) comes out...
This is nothing other than a security research team trying to get some attention by crying wolf.
But having the whole stack open would just be better in general.
Not a vulnerability in the way that Tarlogic makes it sound. Disingenuous and misleading article for sure.