Hacker News Reader

Comment by wyldfire | Hacker News Reader

> BCM43xx family of Wi-Fi chips included in "an extraordinarily wide range of mobile devices" from vendors such as Google (Nexus), Samsung, HTC, and LG.

It would be great if there were a published list of exactly which devices are vulnerable, or a way to check your device for whether this part was present. Is there anything like 'adb shell lspci' I could run to find out whether my devices have the broadcom parts? I know my Nexus 5x has a QCOM SoC, so I assume it lacks broadcom WiFi. But the rest of the family's devices -- what of those?

View on HN

On any device that isn't obscure, iFixit does a teardown detailing most of the parts on the board.

A lot of vendors have multiple designs hiding under the same model, either through time (e.g., PS3 and Xbox 360 each had something like 5 revisions with different chipsets, not all were accompanied by change in box design), or just sharding - iphone 6 had two different models at the same time (one broadcom and one qualcomm IIRC) because they couldn't or wouldn't source the quantities they needed from just one source.

iFixit is nice, but it is not an answer to the request made by GP (an answer to which would be useful).

There are always corner cases. Most phones definitely have the same chipsets, with the exact same parts.

If you are looking for details directly from the device there are various commands to get info like dmesg, getprop. There are other ways (recommended if you have time and patience), like going into /sys/devices, but I really believe it is very common to have same parts for a single mobile device (I think Apple did it because of production problems)

Samsung are pretty notorious for this. Most of their phones come in many different models for different markets, from a quick google, both the S7 and S7 Edge have 14 different variants each. Some have different CPUs, many have differing internal parts, etc. It's a minefield.

[1] http://techbeasts.com/list-of-samsung-galaxy-s7-s7-edge-mode...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com