<ceene>
two microsim in the same area as just the one :)
<DocScrutinizer05>
I doubt we will find a tray for that, and we don't want to use microSIM
<ceene>
why not microsim?
<DocScrutinizer05>
we will go for microsim tray for the 2nd SIM tray, if we need to squeeze space out of the design
<DocScrutinizer05>
because some people don't use microSIM
<ceene>
and...?
<DocScrutinizer05>
and there's no adapter to insert miniSIM into a microSIM tray
<ceene>
don't know, i would just cut my current sim to make it fit
<DocScrutinizer05>
many users don't want to do that
<ceene>
i mean, not that i care that much about sim slot specifically
<ceene>
just looked like something cool
<ceene>
but still can't see the harm in a microsim
<DocScrutinizer05>
the harm is: I - like many of our customers - have no microSIM and I don't want to possibly destroy my SIM card in a clumsy attempt to fit it into a microSIM tray
<DocScrutinizer05>
Neo900 first of all is supposed to be 100% N900 compatible, whenever feasible. This includes SIM formfactor
<DocScrutinizer05>
so we want at least one miniSIM tray
<ceene>
i could understand that if there weren't small devices designed to cut sims into microsims, which shops not only sell but will also cut the sim for you by the gigantic price of 1 euro :)
<DocScrutinizer05>
we could shrink sim tray #2 to micro, if needed
<ceene>
i don't even think there'd be need for that
<DocScrutinizer05>
look, my SIM is from 1999 and is quite precious to me
<ceene>
just that it looks cooler :)
<ceene>
oh, i'm sure you can clone that one
<DocScrutinizer05>
exactly
<DocScrutinizer05>
on my todo list
<ceene>
does 3g work on that sim?
<DocScrutinizer05>
and I couldn't recover the phone number whenever that SIM goes dead
<DocScrutinizer05>
yes
<Sicelo>
i suspect that years to come, miniSIM will not be sold anywhere?
<ceene>
i had a few of my sim cards cloned back then
<DocScrutinizer05>
Sicelo: they still sell NORMAL SIM
<DocScrutinizer05>
size of a credit card
<ceene>
in the end, the one i used, had to change company
<DocScrutinizer05>
actually each SIM I bought is that size
<ceene>
so i got a new card for my old number
<ceene>
it was less traumatic than expected
<Sicelo>
yes, but here for example, no one considers the whole car a SIM :)
<Sicelo>
*card
<DocScrutinizer05>
it however is
<DocScrutinizer05>
with option to break out a mini or micro SIM
<Sicelo>
i suspect we'll still be sold the 'credit card' with only microSIM size cutout in future
<DocScrutinizer05>
why????
<ceene>
i remember a very very old tv ad here in spain for airtel, which got later on bought by vodafone, on which the guy using a 90's phone, would insert a whole full sized sim card into a full sized 90's phone :)
<DocScrutinizer05>
what would be the rationale to not ürovide the miniSIM breakout option?
<Sicelo>
Apple
<DocScrutinizer05>
provide*
<ceene>
some standards will fade out and die, simply because there's not pull enough to keep them alive
<DocScrutinizer05>
FFS, when a SIM provider forces me to Apple, I'll give them the finger. And why the heck would they do to start with?
<Sicelo>
many phones nowadays are either micro or nano
<ceene>
making two cuts in a small plastic card is more expensive than making just one
<Sicelo>
and 'customers' hate the whole process of getting a SIM cut to size
<pigeons>
comeon
<DocScrutinizer05>
so what? **ADD** a nanoSIM breakout option. WHY remove the mini-breakout for that?
<ceene>
DocScrutinizer05: because it's cheaper :)
<DocScrutinizer05>
no! isn't
<ceene>
of course it is
<DocScrutinizer05>
not a single cent
<ceene>
doesn't matter if it's a fraction of a cent
<DocScrutinizer05>
zilch
<ceene>
doing two cuts instead of one means twice the time per card
<Sicelo>
anyway yes, none of us knows the future .. but i will not be surprised with disappearance of the miniSIM
<DocScrutinizer05>
no
<DocScrutinizer05>
the cuts are made with one tool
<DocScrutinizer05>
in one step
<ceene>
so, once that tool breaks and needs replacement they will just buy the nanosim tool
<DocScrutinizer05>
bwahaha
<ceene>
because who the hell wants a minisim when all phones use nanosim?
<ceene>
that'll simply happen
<ceene>
we can bet on it and come here 10 years from now and see who's won :)
<DocScrutinizer05>
who the hell dares to claim "all phones use nanoSIM"??
<ceene>
maybe 10 years from now there's no sim at all
<ceene>
there's already a standard, or at least a proposal, for virtual sims
<ceene>
the sim itself is destined to die
<Sicelo>
not yet DocScrutinizer05 ... but you can see the trend .. miniSIM is basically only low end phones nowadays
<DocScrutinizer05>
normal SIM was, like 30 years ago, and *still* the simcard providers spend real money for the plastic to sell fullsize
<ceene>
why would i insert a microcomputer inside another computer?
<ceene>
that's probably because it's easier and cheaper to buy a machine that builds credit sized card
<DocScrutinizer05>
and as long as they spend 0.1ct per SIM for the huge plastic creditcard, they won't optimize out the miniSIM cut
<Sicelo>
ceene: to build a supercomputer ;)
<ceene>
so you only need one machine to build both credit cards, sims, customer affiliate cards, etc
<ceene>
so either they'll get completely reduced to nanosim or they will simply disappear
<ceene>
simemu could be ported to any computer
<ceene>
so we've been able to live without a sim for decades now
<DocScrutinizer05>
ceene: and that's *exactly* why it won't happen the way you imply
<ceene>
it's a matter of apple wanting to sell you and iWatch that includes LTE
<ceene>
s/and/an/
<DocScrutinizer05>
the whol epurpose of a SIM is: it can't get cloned or stolen via internet data connection
<ceene>
your phone provider doesn't care if you get robbed
<DocScrutinizer05>
they for sure do
<ceene>
they're the firsts to rob you whenever they can :)
<DocScrutinizer05>
so?
<ceene>
they don't care about your security
<ceene>
if apple pushes for an iWatch+LTE, that watch will not use a simcard
<DocScrutinizer05>
do you realy think just because THEY do, they don't care when everybody else does too?
<DocScrutinizer05>
it's THEIR reputation and thus money
<ceene>
it's all a mater of cost*risk
wpwrak has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<DocScrutinizer05>
exactly, and a software-only solution for SIM is a nogo, risk assertion wise
<ceene>
if they deem that selling virtual sims for iWatch users will get them more money than the reputation they may lost for a few scammed clients, they will sell that virtual sim
wpwrak has joined #neo900
<pigeons>
a reason sim cards exist is because it is easier to control that environment
<ceene>
say vodafone gets to exclusively sell iWatches with virtual sims in half of europe
<pigeons>
a big reason
<DocScrutinizer05>
ceene: I checked what's planned for OTA provisioning of credentials aka "virtual SIM" and it's made in a way so you can not implement it in software since you still lack the authentication root cert in the secure element in mobile equuipment
<ceene>
we'll see
<DocScrutinizer05>
no, you can see right now, the specs are semi-public
<ceene>
i mean, we'll see what ends up happening in the end
<ceene>
i'll bet no more sim cards
<DocScrutinizer05>
we already know what's planned for next 5 or so years
<DocScrutinizer05>
and "no more sim cards" doesn't mean you could emulate a phone with virtual SIM on your PC
<ceene>
i can concur with the last one
<DocScrutinizer05>
you lack the rot cert of the Secure Element provider in the ME
<pigeons>
carriers and manufacturers and governemnts certainly dont want that
<DocScrutinizer05>
virtual SIM simply means you need to authenticate yourself with ID card or whatever when buying such phone, so they know who's the owner of the SE
<DocScrutinizer05>
then providers transfer the SIM data over the air directly to the SE on your device
<DocScrutinizer05>
this already works today, with special SIM cards
<DocScrutinizer05>
mini, micro or nano
<DocScrutinizer05>
for SIMless phones that special SIM aka Secure Element is simply integrated into the device and can't get changed
<DocScrutinizer05>
but not much (if anything at all) changes with the way this whole stuff works
<ceene>
wait until they replace it all with a username and password :)
<DocScrutinizer05>
they never will
<ceene>
if my bank only requires that of me, why does my phone require harder security?
<DocScrutinizer05>
your phone is a way more attractive target to mass scam
<ceene>
i don't care about someone sniffing my phone
<ceene>
i for sure care about someone taking a look at my finances
<DocScrutinizer05>
look what happened to the so called phone cards (prepaid) we had e.g. here in Germany
<ceene>
what happened to them?
<DocScrutinizer05>
they got cloned on a mass level, the infinite phonecard
<DocScrutinizer05>
50Eur credit, remove after 4h of call and it resets to a fresh 50Eur credit
<ceene>
cool :)
<ceene>
they did that here in spain, for calling cards that you had to insert into the cab phone
<DocScrutinizer05>
exactly those
<ceene>
click on a small switch and jump credit up to whatever again
<ceene>
back then, vodafone had a curious mobile fare, that would give you money for calls received in your mobile phone
<ceene>
so people would get one of these infinite cards, and call themselves
<ceene>
infinite calls on your mobile phone!
<DocScrutinizer05>
SIM is made to avoid any such scenario (even while the infra is a whole lot more involved for SIM fraud then for calling card)
<DocScrutinizer05>
and you can bet on one thing: they _never_ will switch from that proven protocol to a silly stupid simple user/password scheme
<wpwrak>
ceene: that SIM tray looks nice ! i for one wouldn't mind having a slightly smaller card holder for SIM#2. that thing is rather bulky, and with so many devices using smaller cards these days, i doubt there is any provider that has a problem providing you with a suitable card.
<DocScrutinizer05>
wpwrak: that's not the point
<wpwrak>
also, if cards come pre-cut in a lot of different sizes, that means that there may be a risk that a mini card could come apart in our slot-in holder. so the smaller, the less breakable parts.
<DocScrutinizer05>
there are still a lot of *existing* miniSIM out there. evidence: I got one
<wpwrak>
DocScrutinizer05: yes, your card from the 1990es may be a problem. but i'm sure your provider would replace it if you ask nicely
<DocScrutinizer05>
no
<ceene>
my dad had to have his cut a few months ago
<DocScrutinizer05>
and that's not the point
<DocScrutinizer05>
I'm afk
<ceene>
he paid 1 euro and they gave him the remainings
<ceene>
so he can still rebuild it back with some tape :)
<DocScrutinizer05>
forget it
<ceene>
time to have dinner!
<ceene>
cya!
<DocScrutinizer05>
many N950 users killed their device by using a microSIM adapter in the miniSIM slot
<MonkeyofDoom>
adapters are dangerous?
<DocScrutinizer05>
YES!!
<DocScrutinizer05>
extremely
<DocScrutinizer05>
for slot-in
<MonkeyofDoom>
because of potential for mis-seating and shorts?
<MonkeyofDoom>
or what
<wpwrak>
so this seems to support what i wrote above ?
<DocScrutinizer05>
the contact springs get caught in the slots between microSIM and adapter
<MonkeyofDoom>
ah
<DocScrutinizer05>
wpwrak: for 2nd SIM slot, yes
<DocScrutinizer05>
not though for replacing bot SIM trays by micro
<DocScrutinizer05>
both
<wpwrak>
it may be a nice alternative. except for one user :) admittedly an important one
<DocScrutinizer05>
no, primary SIM tray will stay compatible with N900
<DocScrutinizer05>
we could go triple-SIM with that thing ceene suggested ;-)
<wpwrak>
ceene: we have to encourage DocScrutinizer05 to go to places with a lot of pickpockets. once phone + ancient SIM are stolen and he gets a modern replacement, he'll have no more objections ;-)
<wpwrak>
DocScrutinizer05: how about a stack of SIMs and a little robotic card changer ? ;-)
<wpwrak>
"jukebox" :)
<wpwrak>
anyway, back to editing ...
<DocScrutinizer05>
wpwrak: please stop that
<DocScrutinizer05>
**no, primary SIM tray will stay compatible with N900**
Venemo has joined #neo900
<DocScrutinizer05>
unless no other possible solution than to discard this design spec
<DocScrutinizer05>
reducing N900 compatibility is no desirable feature
<DocScrutinizer05>
on a completely OT sidenote: it sucks that you can't mount two 3"5 HDDs into two adjacent slots in a midi tower without already mounting a dedicated fan to cool them
<DocScrutinizer05>
those critters are rated 60°C max, ~5W idle, ~9W active. They are at 48°C now in idle
<DocScrutinizer05>
with a room temperature of ~20°C
<DocScrutinizer05>
no way this will pan out on heavy activity on storage, on a hot day
* DocScrutinizer05
ponders to control the heater blower (in non heating mode) by a RF sw controlled mains outlet
* Arch-TK
bought this awesome chieftec SAS/SATA backplane with a fan built in.
<Arch-TK>
Amazon broke something and it was discounted from £70 to £12 so I bought one.
<DocScrutinizer05>
for a reason :-)
<Arch-TK>
There was really only one.
<Arch-TK>
If there were more than one, I would have bought up to seven
* DocScrutinizer05
will mount those HDD crotters in a *very* innovative creative way ;-)
<Arch-TK>
Very innovative creative way?
<Arch-TK>
Sometimes I do that with my harddrives which I need to hot swap
<DocScrutinizer05>
they got screw mount holes at their bottom too, so I can mount them long small sides up/down and full contact the the miditower steel
<Arch-TK>
I open up my case, and then I precariously dangle them on the CPU heatsink with the cables plugged in
<Arch-TK>
laptop HDDs only though, if I put a 3.5 inch hdd on there, the heatsink would fall off
<DocScrutinizer05>
both the 'vertical' mount and the resulting convection airflow, as well as the large 'heatsink' from the tower steel should help a lot to keep temperature down
<Arch-TK>
I think you should watercool them.
<Arch-TK>
dunk them in a bucket of water
<Arch-TK>
it's bound to cool them.
<Arch-TK>
HDDs work better when there's water flowing under the heads
<DocScrutinizer05>
should have gotten the (sealed) He6 then
<DocScrutinizer05>
I guess they would work excellent in deionized water
<DocScrutinizer05>
alas they are a tad on the expensive side
<Arch-TK>
so, down to business, any ETA on the Neo900?
<Arch-TK>
What's the hold up now? Still waiting for the layout?
<DocScrutinizer05>
basically yes, plus me and my defective mind and IT infra 'procrastinating' since 4 days on schematics layout
<DocScrutinizer05>
s/layout/update/
<DocScrutinizer05>
which isn't exactly a complete showstopper for the layout, but for sure doesn't help either
<DocScrutinizer05>
I'm just a tad reluctant to do any serious work, as long as /home still resides on a HDD with meanwhile 48 defective irrecoverable non-swappable sectors
<edwin>
is there some page one Neo900.org that explains Neo900's privacy features?
<edwin>
I know it has been discussed on this channel, and there is some info on those slides that I linked, but I couldn't find something better to link to right now
<DocScrutinizer05>
I'm afraid the complete team failed on providing a concise summary on the privacy concept
<edwin>
not very clear from the block diagram if wireless/bluetooth has a kill switch or not, can that 'Tap' switch be used to completely turn off the antennas, or just to select between 2.4 and 5 Ghz?
<wpwrak>
there's no rfkill on wlan/bt. the tap switch is just intended for antenna selection
* wpwrak
wonders is anyone makes coax connectors that are just shield, without the signal pin
<DocScrutinizer05>
that's not a controlled switch and it isn't meant for that. However we can controll the firmware upload to the WLAN/BT module and we consider this secure enough to make sure that this module behaves. It doesn't have a whole stealth OS like the cell modem
<DocScrutinizer05>
edwin: we're on the extremely paranoid side when it comes to design of Neo900 and we think it's just good enough the way we desugned it
<edwin>
:)
<DocScrutinizer05>
after all security is not a thing you design based on guts feeling, you need to first evaluate all possible threat scenarios and then cope with them and mitigate or possibly completely eliminate them
<DocScrutinizer05>
WLAN/BT has no flash with an OS that could get tampered with OTA
<DocScrutinizer05>
at least no such thing is known for the module / chipset we use
<DocScrutinizer05>
so the threat vectors are a very limited set anyway
<edwin>
I was refering to the list/link about protecting the fabrication process as a 'bit too paranoid', the block diagram looks fine to me :)
<edwin>
things like " Protect the process for making the masks." " Ensure, as in (1), security of their computers, tools, and processes.", etc.
<DocScrutinizer05>
yes, that's nonsense
<edwin>
at least for Neo900 nobody would bother to perform an attack like that
<edwin>
if you're fabricating widespread Intel chips, maybe
<DocScrutinizer05>
it's theoretically possible to introduce a backdoored or otherwise rogue special mask for a chip, but then how would anybody make sure this tailored-to-custom chip gets bought by us?
<edwin>
right
<DocScrutinizer05>
we're only buying a maybe 500 or 1000 chips while the manuf and resellers sell 100000s of them
<DocScrutinizer05>
when the backdoor is in *all* of them, then it either will get noticed sooner or later or it doesn't work in our special scenario and in the end our threat vector analysis considers each chip possibly rogue
<DocScrutinizer05>
there's simply nothing the WLAN could reasonably do to compormise the privacy of the user, in Neo900
<edwin>
I can think of a few reasons why someone might want WLAN/BT/all radios to be off: the OS running on the CPU could get compromised, and turn on WLAN/BT and transmit something, but in the end you can't keep every radio off indefinetely in a phone ... cause then its not a phone anymore
<DocScrutinizer05>
when the CPU got compromised, you're doomed
<DocScrutinizer05>
period
<edwin>
yeah
<DocScrutinizer05>
that's why we only use FOSS software
<DocScrutinizer05>
the only way to make sure the CPU is _not_ compromised
<edwin>
Neo900 will be much better than my other phones, can't wait to receive it :)
<DocScrutinizer05>
actually the last statement isn't correct. We don't use *any* software, we leave that to our customers who will get their software from whichever trustworthy channels they like
<edwin>
you don't force your customers to use a specific software, yeah
<DocScrutinizer05>
exactly
<DocScrutinizer05>
that's why for Neo900 no physical throwswitch is needed, you should trust the software you picked and installed or youre doomed anyway
<DocScrutinizer05>
while the HW design of Neo900 guarantees that your software is in control _always_
<edwin>
lets hope the people that said they'll buy a phone with such as switch on HN will actually take a look at Neo900
<DocScrutinizer05>
they will, then see the price, and start another round of "W*T*F?!"
<edwin>
its easy to say that (I'd buy X if only it did Y), but for some reason these hardware projects always struggle to find enough people to actually pay
<edwin>
I'm also waiting for my Talos Workstation, apparently not enough preorders yet
lobito has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
lobito1 has joined #neo900
<edwin>
in fact Neo900 and Talos's goals seem somewhat similar: Neo900 would give me control over my phone, Talos would give me control over my desktop (no Intel ME / AMD PSP). I wonder whether you should talk and share ideas or could help eachother somehow
jonsger has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
<pigeons>
I'm not familiar with Talos
<pigeons>
there are lots of projects that are more marketing than technology. purism, blackphone, etc