Ubuntu alpha apparently breaking hardware, shattering dreams

Well, it looks like the good times that are the Ubuntu alpha testing process hit a bit of a snag recently, as one of the latest kernels apparently had the nasty side effect of irreparably damaging some users' hardware -- specifically, certain Intel network cards. So far, it seems that only laptops have been affected by the bug, which corrupts the NVRAM used to store data like MAC addresses, but folks don't seem to be ruling out the possibility that it could affect desktops as well. What's more, while a warning has been added to the ISO download, it hasn't been pulled altogether, with the only explanation given being that it would delay the 8.10 release schedule too much. Not entirely surprisingly, that has prompted at least a few folks to give up on testing alpha versions of the OS, at least until this whole thing gets sorted out.

[Thanks, JagsLive]

[Brian @ Sep 26th 2008 1:10PM]

You expect a few bad bugs in a OS alpha stage but not this bad.

Shocking.

[Curtis Joslin @ Sep 26th 2008 1:13PM]

Someone fucked up.... bad....

[Chris @ Sep 26th 2008 1:16PM]

There's a difference between "a few bad bugs" and bugs that destroy hardware.

[Testies, Testies, 1, 2... 3? @ Sep 26th 2008 1:23PM]

It could be worse....

http://lh6.ggpht.com/shaileshdoke/SDym7NzNupI/AAAAAAAAAq4/sLfF2cd_muQ/Hack%20and%20Blow%20like%20Bomb%5B5%5D.jpg

[dv @ Sep 26th 2008 1:27PM]

in my opinion, it is bad hardware design if it *can* be irreversibly damaged by software. there should be checks at the hardware level against that, as well as ways to factory-reset any piece of hardware that commercially ships.

[fanman @ Sep 26th 2008 1:39PM]

These people do it for free, they owe you nothing.

[Ellianth @ Sep 26th 2008 1:43PM]

Whoopsiedaisy. Lol

[Kamokazi @ Sep 26th 2008 1:57PM]

@dv

There is no reasonable way to do that with many types of hardware. You need to be able to write data to areas which contain the necessary code that allows data to be written to that area, because somtimes the code that communicates with external devices needs updating, so you cannot 'protect' that code in any way.

[Randavance @ Sep 26th 2008 2:20PM]

@ Curtis
@ Chris

I'm not sure if you guys really know much about Linux, but I've been running it over half my life, and one of the first things I learned is never run anything that's an alpha. They aren't meant for real hardware yet, unless your a developer (and this goes for the majority of them too) you should run it in a virtual machine. If you want a sneak preview, wait for a beta, if you want a current system, use a current build, and if you want a stable system, get an older "stable" build.

[NHAnimator @ Sep 26th 2008 2:34PM]

"You expect a few bad bugs in a OS alpha stage but not this bad. Shocking."

Well, I can tell you that I'm running the alpha build right now and I haven't... OW! What the hell was that?!?

[rock99rock @ Sep 26th 2008 2:37PM]

@ dv

Why would intel need to protect their hardware against Operating systems it was not designed for? HMMmmm?

[Gojulas @ Sep 26th 2008 2:46PM]

@rock99rock

Last I checked, hardware isn't usually designed AROUND operating systems. And moreover if Intel's industry standard networking hardware wasn't "designed" to run under Linux kernels, I doubt they would code their own drivers for them...

[urandom @ Sep 26th 2008 2:56PM]

@rock:

considering both e1000 and e1000e drivers are actually written by Intel itself, I find your comment quite amusing

[urandom @ Sep 26th 2008 3:01PM]

@rock

You comment would've held some credibility, if it wasn't for the fact that Intel Writes Their Own Modules

[Andir3.0 @ Sep 26th 2008 3:23PM]

@Kamokazi:

Sure you can. Motherboard manufacturers have been doing it for YEARS. I've even un-bricked my WRT54G router that had a bad flash. It's all in the design.

[FlashX @ Sep 26th 2008 4:58PM]

Do people not know what Alpha version of a piece of software means? It means it's not even ready for testing. It's when developers are still adding to the schedule release. It is in Beta stage you have something worthwhile testing. Well so you might ask what's the point of Alpha versions? ( Mainly for integration testing, developer testing and not aimed for the general public). If you use Alpha or Beta that's too bad, you shouldn't be using those if you have the slightest clue what's going on. That's why there are official release date. This is good though that this bug was found in the Alpha stages of development rather than final gold master.

[BigD145 @ Sep 26th 2008 9:15PM]

Intel network cards usually have problems with both Linux and Mac installs.

[linuxamp @ Sep 29th 2008 12:15AM]

@dv "in my opinion, it is bad hardware design if it *can* be irreversibly damaged by software."

How do you suggest updating BIOS, firmware etc? The reason so many devices say "UPDATING FIRMWARE. DO NOT POWER OFF" is because it's difficult/expensive to design hardware which requires updates yet cannot be damaged irreversibly. You'd have to have a reliable redundant power source such as a battery should power go out during the write, or a secondary fallback firmware (as some motherboards/servers now have).

There are also various levels of irreversibility (not sure if that's a real word). The actual bug report says "recovery may be possible via a BIOS update". That's not so painful. Other techniques might include shorting pins (http://www.linksysinfo.org/forums/showthread.php?t=47259) or pulling off a chip and using an eeprom burner. At what point do you consider a device irreversibly damaged?

[vdogg89 @ Sep 26th 2008 1:10PM]

Nooooooo!

[rock99rock @ Sep 26th 2008 2:38PM]

Apparently, yes.

[Rob @ Sep 26th 2008 1:13PM]

This is a bit discouraging. I'm currently running Ubuntu on my laptop. But, this news really scare me.
Hopefully it gets corrected soon.

[blizz419 @ Sep 26th 2008 1:28PM]

as long as its not this alpha version your fine, if your not sure then i'd say you have a final version and nothing to worry about

[Mark @ Sep 26th 2008 1:43PM]

Can this bug affect the hardware even if you turn it off (disable) the LAN card in the BIOS?

[Randavance @ Sep 26th 2008 2:22PM]

It's an alpha.

Alphas always have horrible bugs that make them unusable to the end user. They should not be played with unless your developing.

Just wait for the current build and it'll run fine.

[Kevlar @ Sep 26th 2008 2:43PM]

@Mark:
I doubt it would affect disabled cards, since the issue most-likely stems from faulty drivers. If those drivers aren't loaded, then the card isn't used, and the probability of issues occurring decreases dramatically.

While I didn't RTFA, that's just my opinion.

[giuliop @ Sep 26th 2008 5:27PM]

"Hopefully it gets corrected soon."

Don't count on it. Once they find a bug, they usually leave it alone until the final version. That's what alpha and beta releases are for: to let bug proliferate.

[Scythe @ Sep 26th 2008 1:14PM]

Wow...and I was looking at installing the alpha today on my laptop since it's nearing the end of alpha testing. Glad I read this first...

[Marcus Hesse @ Sep 26th 2008 1:23PM]

Wow...never heard of an OS permanently damaging hardware. Thought only bad flashing & overclocking could do that....

[raul @ Sep 26th 2008 1:15PM]

So that's why it's called an alpha... RIP faithful warriors... your p0rn will be safe with us.

[Alex L. @ Sep 26th 2008 1:24PM]

Raul,

I'm a software developer, and although the concept of Alpha and Beta software is relative, in general I believe that Alpha means "If you run this software the way it is, there's a very high chance of a bug being found at this stage, and a high chance that the software will crash", when in Beta the crashes should be pretty much erradicated and this stage is what i call the "bug hunting" stage.

Software that corrupts hardware is definitely pre-public release material.

[Andir3.0 @ Sep 26th 2008 3:12PM]

So Alex... you have every piece of hardware ever made to test your software on? Eventually it has to be pushed public to see how it performs. Sure, it's a driver and only affecting Intel cards, but using the generic driver model to support multiple cards can sometimes have quirks.

In all honesty, the hardware (if it requires a flash ROM of some sort) should have protection against catastrophic failure from overwriting the ROM. Motherboards have been implementing stuff like this for some time and even before that, they had methods of reprogramming them.

[Bluekkis @ Sep 26th 2008 1:16PM]

Nice way to make it a problem on one distro, when in fact its a bug in intel ethernet driver in 2.6.27 release candidate kernel. (don't remember exact driver name), and affects all distros using that kernel.

[Ash @ Sep 26th 2008 1:58PM]

Its the e1000e Intel network driver and only affects that chip. Its a kernel driver bug (and as dv said, shouldn't even have been possible in the hardware in the first place) that affects all distributions that are using a 2.6.27-rc kernel.

Ultimately, though, I believe "alpha" releases do (or should, at least) imply a certain level of readiness. I personally don't try out an Ubuntu pre-release until its final, and I have years of personal and professional linux experience.

YMMV

[cius @ Sep 26th 2008 4:40PM]

I despise stories like this. I feel its a blatant abuse of power when an otherwise respectable news outlet plasters one vendor's logo and name all over a bad news story. The offense is particularly egregious when several other sources have already reported on the problem and subsequently tracked it to its root. At best this story was badly researched and in my opinion, that reflects badly upon the author.

[Mike @ Sep 27th 2008 9:36AM]

This man speaks the truth.

Wasn't there a Slashdot article about another distro doing this a few days ago? It was also wrong to label that distro at fault when it is really a Kernel Issue

[Krit @ Sep 26th 2008 1:19PM]

This bug applies to all distros using the as of yet unreleased 2.6.27 version of the linux kernel.

This is not strictly an ubuntu bug/mistake

[linuxamp @ Sep 29th 2008 12:23AM]

So this is sort of a blow to Linux in general... Damn.

While you could argue that this is alpha software and carries risks, the problem is that many people who would be testing this and future alpha versions and reporting bugs will now hesitate to run early release software, ultimately slowing down the release process.

One could argue "you should be running alpha in VMs" but VMs have a very limited virtual hardware set. You can't reliably test hardware compatibility in VMs.

[Leonardo @ Sep 26th 2008 1:27PM]

It is not an Ubuntu bug only.
It is a Linux kernel bug, for all 2.6.27 releases before rc7.
It damages e1000 Intel ethernet cards, writing in their EEPROM.

[Ray @ Sep 26th 2008 1:42PM]

how does a fuk up like this even happen? werent there any safe gaurds to checking what rom it could write into?

[CaptSaltyJack @ Sep 26th 2008 1:58PM]

Linux kernel: "im in ur eeprom, ruining ur bits"

[Backlin @ Sep 26th 2008 2:10PM]

Dang it captsaltyjack, I was thinking the same exact thing!

Good thing I don't run any alpha software. I'm a firm believer in not distributing alpha software altogether, unless you absolutely hate somebody! >:-)

[pball_inuyaha @ Sep 26th 2008 6:51PM]

since i'm already low rated all around for my valid questions and points.

@msalivar
So what? I would like to know more about computers and what is possible with them. I doubt someone who wants to cause physical harm through hacking and virus's is gonna use this site to gather info.

so all in all I'm disappointed at you guys, I've had questions and statements replied to in a kind and helpful manner in the past or just ignored. But this is ridiculous.

[pball_inuyaha @ Sep 26th 2008 1:27PM]

I've been interested in if it's possible to kill hardware with software. I'd like to know if there are methods of killing other specific types (like a brand or model) or general hardware with software.

[pball_inuyaha @ Sep 26th 2008 2:43PM]

So now people who ask real questions get low ranked?

and not one reply even relates to what I said, why?

[Jarhead2012 @ Sep 26th 2008 2:51PM]

Because you sound like someone who's waaaaaaaaay too interested in hacking someone.

[pball_inuyaha @ Sep 26th 2008 3:23PM]

So anyone interested in anything immediately wants to put that knowledge to use then is what your saying. I'm interested in many things dangerous and basically illegal, but I'm never gonna do anything with all that I know.

Besides I couldn't hack a computer unless you hand it to me.

[msalivar @ Sep 26th 2008 4:40PM]

Even if it's not your intention, it could be someone's whos reading this thread.

[pizzicato @ Sep 26th 2008 1:41PM]

The bug in the e1000e driver has been around for some days in kernel 2.6.27-rc1 to rc4. This is not ubuntu specific, but a problem of all upcoming linux versions like ubuntu intrepid, suseLE 11.1, fedora "rawhide", see here f. ex.: http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-announce/2008-09/msg00017.html

In versions 2.6.27-rc5 (sept. 23rd) and newer module e1000e is IMHO blacklisted by default. But you better check that yourself before you install any alpha on your system.

[Aaron @ Sep 26th 2008 1:46PM]

Everyone seems to forget that this isn't an UBUNTU specific problem. It effects ALL distros using the latest kernel (2.6.27-3 I believe) Don't be so quick to assign blame to Ubuntu!

[ethana2 @ Sep 29th 2008 11:21AM]

The first distro I saw get blamed for this was actually Fedora..