It works on some devices; they do sign the builds as far as I can tell. But the bootloader itself needs to be convinceable to trust the LOS signatures, and needs to understand the secure boot implementation used in the Android that the current LOS is built from (since Android has re-done it all a few times). Nobody knows anything about bootloaders to figure out which of them can do this or how they would be induced to do it.
planish
qsnc is a gentleperson and a scholar
You can print out QR codes to Rick Astley videos.
Thank you, I love to see these memes of production.
I wouldn't recommend linking to it because IIRC it's one of those web sites that can't actually be relied on to serve the thing you linked to to the person who clicks the link. Instead it likes to serve complaints that they don't have an account, kind of like Instagram.
ships 320 security vulnerabilities
still a company
That's not allowed on Wikipedia, you have to use verifiable information from reliable secondary sources instead.
So you would have to pair this with a switch that not only does VLANs but also somehow does your NAT for you.
The vector from one point to another in space has both a distance (magnitude) and a direction. Labeling the side with i only really makes sense if you say we're looking at a vector of "i units that way", and not at an assertion that these two points are a directionless i units apart. Then you'd have to break out the complex norms somebody mentioned.
Usually the routers you install OpenWRT on are really a CPU with one port to a VLAN-capable switch, and the port labeled WAN on the device is just VLAN'd separately by default. One cool thing OpenWRT lets you do on "normal" hardware is change the VLAN settings on the switch ports which are not accessible under stock firmware.
But if they are shipping "just" the router piece and making people go get their own VLAN-capable switch, I'm not sure what hardware exactly they expect people to use? And I'm not sure what being connected to the switch over one real 2.5G cable is going to do to LAN/WAN throughput, vs. how a "normal" router ties the CPU into the switch through means not known to mortal minds. Maybe it is just as good, maybe it is a huge bottleneck. It is definitely going to add cost over the $89 sticker price.
But if most people are just going to run fiber modem straight to WiFi, maybe this is the right config actually?
I don't think that's what accepting harmful interference means. It means more like, if there is noise in the channel, the device won't just up its own power to clobber the noise, even if not doing that will somehow break it or otherwise make it not work right. It doesn't mean you have to build the device so that some kinds of interference will cause it to break.
Nice try, phone thieves.