1,419 karma · joined January 23, 2023
Edit: I see another green comment was flagged for AI, might be indicative of something, but why so many green comments on this thread specifically?
Unifi released the UCG-Fiber around a year ago that can also apparently finally handle it, but plenty of threads about slow performance with their UDMs since it's entirely done on the CPU [0].
I'm not the biggest fan of OpenWRT and would prefer something like OPNSense, but it's x86 only and good PPPoE performance isn't guaranteed either - need a CPU with good single core performance that costs more than the BPI-R4, or apparently virtualizing OPNSense allows it to process PPPoE with multiple threads.
0: https://community.ui.com/questions/What-is-the-max-performan...
> Lenovo tells us, “The biggest challenge in getting to a 10/10 was balancing repairability with all the other expectations of a commercial device: performance, reliability, thermal efficiency, form factor, and design integrity. Repairability isn’t achieved by a single change: it requires many small, intentional decisions across the entire system, and each of those decisions can introduce trade-offs.
> Five entire countries vanished from GreyNoise telnet data: Zimbabwe, Ukraine, Canada, Poland, and Egypt. Not reduced — zero.
> An attacker sends -f root as the username value, and login(1) obediently skips authentication, handing over a root shell. No credentials required. No user interaction.
> The GreyNoise Global Observation Grid recorded a sudden, sustained collapse in global telnet traffic — not a gradual decline, not scanner attrition, not a data pipeline problem, but a step function. One hour, ~74,000 sessions. The next, ~22,000.
> That kind of step function — propagating within a single hour window — reads as a configuration change on routing infrastructure, not behavioral drift in scanning populations.
(and I'm not just pointing these out because of the em dashes)
GPTZero (which is just another AI model that can have similar flaws and is definitely not infallible, but is at least another data point) rates my excerpts as 78% chance AI written, 22% chance of AI-human mix.
To me at least, the article still seems to be majority human-written, though.
What exactly is it comparing? What is the “firmware embedded version number”? With an unlocked bootloader you can flash boot and super (system, vendor, etc) partitions, but I must be missing something because it seems like this would be bypassable.
It does say
> Custom ROMs package firmware components from the stock firmware they were built against. If a user's device has been updated to a fused firmware version & they flash a custom ROM built against older firmware, the anti-rollback mechanism triggers immediately.
and I know custom ROMs will often say “make sure you flash stock version x.y beforehand” to ensure you’re on the right firmware, but I’m not sure what partitions that actually refers to (and it’s not the same as vendor blobs), or how much work it is to either build a custom ROM against a newer firmware or patch the (hundreds of) vendor blobs.
And if I stole something physical you had for sale, you wouldn’t make the money, so the end result is effectively the same.
Always glad to see this.
Can you elaborate on this? I don't know much about WiFi so I'm curious what CPU work the router needs to do and what wouldn't be offloaded to hardware somehow (like most routing/forwarding/QoS duties can be).
And does it only write to SFP modules from Ubiquiti (looking at you FS BOX)?
Another tool you can use for this (without a nice UI) is the SFP Buddy: https://oopselectronics.com/product/SFPB
What does the board look like, why can’t I DIY that version, etc. Are they just trying to make it up with the software (that I also can’t tell what it looks like).
Why is this an advantage? As in, what's the downside to having to port forward?