Industry Concerns Remain on FCC's Proposed Changes to RF Device Certification Rules
The New America Foundation’s Open Technology Institute and Google added their voices to those raising concerns on whether the FCC’s proposed new device certification rules would prohibit third-party firmware installation on devices, including Wi-Fi routers (see 1509300063). The FCC has received many short comments that raised similar concerns. Other industry commenters saw most of the proposed changes as helpful on the whole, streamlining the certification process.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
Julius Knapp, chief of the Office of Engineering and Technology, last week released a blog post attempting to allay concerns about the implications for open-source software (see 1510080069). Comments were posted in docket 15-170 Friday and Tuesday by the FCC.
The FCC should “exercise caution” in pushing forward changes that “would threaten innovation in the wireless space and curtail development of community broadband initiatives,” the Open Technology Institute (OTI) said. The proposed new requirements “could drive the proliferation of unnecessarily restrictive cryptographic measures that block access to software on a wide range of RF-enabled devices,” OTI said. “By preventing individuals, startups, and non-commercial organizations from altering devices in entirely lawful ways that do not create the risk of harmful interference, such controls would also threaten more broadly to limit the innovation that has been the hallmark of the unlicensed bands.”
Most of the proposed changes are positive, Google said. “Unfortunately, not all router manufacturers have added substantial security measures, included IPv6 support, or provided for continuous improvement of performance after purchase,” the tech player said. “The open source community and academics, among others, have stepped up to fill that gap. Using open source resources generated by these parties, Wi-Fi vendors have been able to improve their existing routers by flashing firmware on them.” The FCC’s proposed rules “could frustrate this beneficial process,” Google said.
The Center for Democracy & Technology raised concerns similar to those of OTI and Google. The proposed rules “could interfere with efforts to improve the adaptability and security of the firmware controlling routers and other RF devices, and also needlessly subject device owners and researchers to potential liability under Section 1201 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act,” CDT said.
The Software Freedom Law Center said the FCC has proposed regulations in an area better left alone. “The Commission has no statutory authority to regulate the software running in general purpose computers, or even the software running in RF transmitter modules that does not involve or define the RF transmission characteristics of the device,” the center said. “Our clients, and the larger community that produces free software, have no interest in interfering with the Commission's rule-making within the scope of its jurisdiction. But any effort by the Commission to regulate how software is licensed that performs all the other functions in, e.g. WiFi routers, access points, or client hardware threatens their freedom to invent.”
CEA generally supported the proposed changes simplifying the rules for RF device certification. But CEA also said the FCC should be careful in imposing new restrictions on changing firmware. “The FCC’s security proposal would make updates to firmware more difficult, both to fix run-of-the-mill software glitches or to patch a cyber-security vulnerability that has been identified,” CEA said. “Rules that hamper the ability of manufacturers to repair software glitches in the field should not be adopted.”
Samsung supported the move to e-labeling, saying it will help device makers bring devices to market faster. “Even as the time periods between designing, manufacturing, marketing, distributing, and replacing devices shrink every year, devices cannot actually be produced and distributed until labeling requirements are finalized; and the latter cannot happen until testing and regulatory approvals are completed,” Samsung said. The requirement that RF devices carry warnings has become more burdensome as devices get smaller and the associated “real estate” available “for physical labels decreases,” Samsung said.
CTIA said many of the proposed changes are timely and generally reflect how RF devices are designed. “The changes that the Commission proposes in the NPRM will result in substantially increased efficiencies, reduced costs, and faster introduction of equipment to market, while still ensuring that RF devices operating in the United States do not cause harmful interference,” the wireless association said.
The FCC’s equipment rules work, the Telecommunications Industry Association said. “While the system has been successful, the Commission should be constantly examining its rules and procedures for opportunities to make improvements,” TIA said. “By prioritizing the streamlining of its equipment authorization rules, the Commission will enable greater investment in new, cutting-edge products such as software-defined radio and modular transmitter-based devices that respond to market-driven demands and will be key to the deployment of the Internet of Things.”