I hate the swapped Fn-Ctrl keys. Will it be possible to change them to Ctrl-Fn in BIOS (like in some Lenovo laptops https://support.lenovo.com/th/en/documents/ht074187) or to order a keyboard with Ctrl-Fn key placement?
This is very important: http://www.slideshare.net/phdays/tapping-into-the-core “Modern CPU (Skylake+) design allows using JTAG-like interface through USB which gives total control over the system”
Librem 13 v1 is not vulnerable as it uses older (5xxx series) CPU, but what about L13v2? Which CPU will it use?
If 6xxx-7xxx series - is Intel Direct Connect Interface (DCI) disabled by default in L13v2? Is it possible to permanently disable it without possibility to re-enable using software methods (i.e. without having to open the laptop and set up some jumpers or whatever)?
Provide more info about the hardware please. I’d like to know all about theoretically possible hardware backdoors in v2.
Does L13v2 have a TPM chip? If yes - which brand and model? AFAIR one of TPM manufacturers has a backdoor in a chip making all the security features of TPM useless. I will share a link if I find it.
Does L13v2 have a BMC chip?
What about BIOS? Any success with coreboot yet?
Is it possible to order the laptop without storage at all? I do not need any storage as I’m happy with Samsung 950 Pro NVMe drive in my current laptop and I want to just move it to L13v2.
Yes, just choose “None” for both disk type options: https://puri.sm/shop/librem-13/. Please have in mind that we cannot be obliged to provide you support in case you want to install disks yourself.
Is it too difficult to make the swapping in BIOS like Lenovo does?
Will there be an option to include the TPM chip? I’d like to have a TPM 1.2 chip (TPM 2.0 is not currently supported by userspace programs) for additional security.
I did not find any backdoor proofs yet, except this vuln: http://hackaday.com/2010/02/09/tpm-crytography-cracked/ - but it requires a bit more than “usual” physical access.
Oh, AFAIR last time I checked one of the hard disks was mandatory, that’s why I asked this question. Thanks for pointing this out.
I don’t think this will be changed, but I check and report back. Problem is that we have only one prototype device atm, which is used for Coreboot development.
After digging a little further, it seems that Broadwell predates Thunderbolt 3, so it seems that USB-C ports would be a bit wasteful. But I look forward to a formal confirmation.