




Creating A Super-Router (For Free) 329
Aaron writes "Kind of an interesting discussion and story over at Broadband Reports about the flurry of vendors releasing modified Linux based firmware updates for the Linksys WRT54G router. The updates bring a whole new level of functionality Linksys couldn't be bothered to incorporate. Among a long list of free improvements is the incorporation of bandwidth management, allowing users to end the days of choppy VoIP conversations without swapping out hardware."
For the do it yourselfer (Score:5, Informative)
Here's a detailed guide [seattlewireless.net] on how to do just that.
Re:For the do it yourselfer (Score:5, Informative)
This guy [wifi-box.net] has packaged firmware flashes that incorporate the most popular expansions. All I wanted was some basic SNMP, and it provided - along with some other handy features.
Re:For the do it yourselfer (Score:5, Insightful)
NOW they tell me (Score:5, Funny)
Re:NOW they tell me (Score:2, Funny)
Wondershaper... (Score:5, Informative)
It is AMAZING.
Sample config:
DOWNLINK=6000
UPLINK=200
DEV=eth0
# low priority source ports
NOPRIOPORTSRC="6881 6882 6883 6884 6885 6886 6887 6888 6889 80"
Sets those ports to only use up 200k of my 256k upstream leaving me the rest for SSH etc. I never have any problems w/my remote connection speeds this way. It's fantastic.
I have only had a single problem, recently, with Debian unstable... It removed my libatm for some reason. I reinstalled that and all was well.
Highly recommended for everyone, not just users of this "hackable" router.
Re:Wondershaper... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Wondershaper... (Score:3, Informative)
This runs as a simple shell script on the "router". If you want less bandwith for those ports just change the UPLINK and rerun the shell script. Changes are reflected immediately.
Honestly, when the libatm wasn't working with Debian unstable, I looked at other options but wondershaper was still the fastest and easiest!
Re:Wondershaper... (Score:2, Interesting)
Still, its much much better than not shaping
(Yes, I know the MSS can be reduced, however that messes up overall transfer rates).
Re:Wondershaper... (Score:5, Informative)
Not quite, you're shaping your entire uplink to 200kb and not using the extra at all. To quote the wondershaper source:
Thats the class all uploads are shaped through. If you read the script all the other traffic classes are set with parent 1:1 which is the classid of the above. With tc you have to run all traffic through the available classes otherwise it gets 0kb rather than any remaining bandwidth, I accidently broke a netcafe once by forgetting to put DNS traffic into any class. Wondershaper does actually assign all traffic to 3 classes within the above, each with differing priority.
The ports you mention are given lower priority but within that class, so within that bandwidth set in $UPLINK.
Re:Wondershaper... (Score:3, Informative)
You can mark packets from iptables rules and tc can read those marks and use them to classify traffic by using the mangle rules and --set-mark.
Sounds simple but that gives you incredible power to setup QoS on linux routers. You can provide QoS on any of the filters iptables uses, so for instance you could use the layer 7 protocol filters (experimental) and limit traffic by protocol even if it's running over non-standard ports.
Afaik no Cisco/Junip
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Cisco will try to stop this somehow (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Cisco will try to stop this somehow (Score:5, Interesting)
Last month, my company was looking for a replacement for the overly expensive, hard to manage firewall. Our favorite consultants (who seem think we are idiots and yet don't understand the words "packet filtering") tried to sell us on a Cisco firewall device that was something like $2000. I thought this was insane, seeing as all we needed was a nice interface to ipchains (nobody but me knows Linux here, so that wasn't an option). I look at LinkSys, but they didn't have anything which would do anything more advanced than direct NAT. This seemed strange to me, as at home I had a Linksys firewall router that allowed me to do pretty much whatever I liked when it came to mapping ports and setting up load balancing.
Dlink -- who used to be a direct competitor to Linksys in every segment of the market -- had an awesome device which rivalled the features of the Cisco router for only $300. I had a problem with the first one they sent out, got good support and they sent me a replacement. I had that one up and running in an afternoon without a problem (well, with one problem, but that was due to the Cisco cable router, not the Dlink). And we saved so much money, we could afford a nice spam filter and a new development server. And the new device has a nice, fairly unbuggy web interface that is way easier to use than plain ipchains/iptables with MOST of the functionality (it does bomb out after a certain number of NAT mappings, but since this thing is only 300 MHz I suppose that's for the best).
Re:Cisco will try to stop this somehow (Score:4, Informative)
I don't know why they would want to hold back Linksys development though, especially for things such as IPv6. They are a smart company, so I cannot figure out why they think holding back development of Linksys is going to advance their cause of spreading the use of IPv6.
There are lots of people who use Linksys, but are not willing to spend a lot of extra cash just to get a Cisco box so they can do IPv6. And the more people that demand IPv6, the more ISPs are going to have to buy new Cisco hardware to upgrade their higher-end routers.
IPv6 adoption (Score:2)
Re:Cisco will try to stop this somehow (Score:2, Redundant)
Re:Cisco will try to stop this somehow (Score:5, Insightful)
That's only true if you're not doing anything but routing. Start adding in any features that are remotely useful, and you've gone from CEF/fast switching to process switching. And that means you take a 5x to 10x performance hit.
You actually have to purchase a *VERY* expensive Cisco to get one that can't be out-performed by even a relatively modest PC.
And even on the high-end, there are PC's that will completely blow away any but the very largest offerings from Cisco.
There are, of course, several real advantages to using a Cisco router instead of a PC. First and foremost, if you have the money for it, you're going to be able to find a network interface for almost any type of network you can imagine. DSL to SONET, the interfaces are there for the buying. I'd *almost* say that they would "just work", but that's not always the case. I just had to upgrade the IOS versio on one of my Ciscos (a *paid* upgrade) to get nothing but support for an additional ethernet WIC.
Another large (perhaps HUGE) advantage is the fact that as long as you want to keep paying the money for it, there will always be someone there to back you up and make sure your problem gets resolved, even if you're not capable of fixing it yourself.
So, I'm not saying that there's no use for Cisco. I'm just saying that absolute performance (and especially price-for-performance) are not real advantages for them.
I don't know why they would want to hold back Linksys development though
You can't? Let's think about it: Do you think they'd rather sell a $200 Linksys router, or a $2,000+ Cisco router?
I know, it sounds cynical. Unfortunately, I've worked in enough corporations to know that is *exactly* how decisions are made on these things.
They'll keep the Linksys line around for the low-end market, the home users that don't demand much. But for anything above that, they're never going to let Linksys compete with their Cisco line. They're not stupid.
steve
no hardware based routing in a $2k cisco im afraid (Score:4, Informative)
No it isnt. Not in a $2000 cisco.
You need a (starting at)$15k cisco for that.
The $2k ciscos are all bottom-end ciscos which do everything in CPU and software.
Re:Cisco will try to stop this somehow (Score:5, Informative)
Cisco (at the time anyway) wanted to keep them "as is"... dunno if that's still the case or not.
Linksys isn't bad (Score:2, Informative)
A feature I'd like to see added to my router... (Score:3, Offtopic)
Regardless, my router's a Netgear, so I'm guessing this isn't really applicable here. Although it would be nice to see similar projects for other routers, if possible.
-N
Re:A feature I'd like to see added to my router... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:A feature I'd like to see added to my router... (Score:3, Interesting)
-N
Re:A feature I'd like to see added to my router... (Score:5, Insightful)
www.customdns.com -> thog.dyndns.org
The CNAME will always track your dyndns name that way
JOhn
Re:A feature I'd like to see added to my router... (Score:2)
-N
How is this different? (Score:4, Interesting)
It's got built-in QoS, which can prioritize traffic. You can choose low or high priority based on either your IP port number, or one of the LAN ports (at least, the first four).
I've tried it out, and it worked pretty well when I needed to slow down BitTorrent so that my dad could use his web browser and email (otherwise, BitTorrent was eating *all* of my bandwidth).
It wasn't great for having fine control, but it worked well enough to solve the problem for me.
Re:How is this different? (Score:2)
Re:How is this different? (Score:2, Insightful)
The proper solution is to throttle in the router.
Not true (Score:4, Funny)
Tha t's abs olutel y n ot true.
-- Reg ards
Sanf ord Wall ace [wired.com]
Re:Not true (Score:5, Funny)
-l
Re:Not true (Score:5, Interesting)
However, I definately noticed a drop in the sound quality when he switched back to VOIP. I also noticed he hadn't canceled his landline subscription yet.
Re:Not true (Score:2)
-l
Re:Not true (Score:5, Funny)
And how exactly are we to distinguish the VoIP dropoffs from the RealPlayer dropoffs?
Re:Not true, either (Score:2)
-l
For free? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:For free? (Score:2)
heh. Free as in "whateva-you-can-pull-outta-the-dumpsta-before-th
Re:For free? (Score:5, Funny)
so, that's "free, but it stinks?"
hack for WAP54G - higher power output (Score:5, Informative)
Is that linux based system available for the WAP as well? (Dunno if it's got enough RAM & flash memory to run&store it...)
Re:hack for WAP54G - higher power output (Score:3, Interesting)
Also, I doubt that people have done much spectral analysis to see if it's dirty like the WAP11 hack (which actually wasn't as dirty as first thought). I've also heard rumors (I tend not to believe either side of an argument) that upping the power drives the power amp harder which could be bad to both it's life and heat spilling into other components could lessen their life too.
Currently people are testing the power-hack on the WRT54G... so fa
Re:hack for WAP54G - higher power output (Score:2)
Which is a disaster for an $80 product which will be well and truly obsolete before it dies a natural death. Also, I think the FCC would have a hard time catching you and I can see them dragging you off to prison for it.
Re:hack for WAP54G - higher power output (Score:4, Interesting)
There's no good reason to, however. These use lousy transmitters, and S/N goes way downhill as you boost power levels. Quadrupling the power could end up cutting your speeds in half at the expense of a bit more distance.
Re:hack for WAP54G - higher power output (Score:5, Informative)
Re:hack for WAP54G - higher power output (Score:3, Informative)
So your useful choices are fairly limited. You might have to coordinate with your neighbors to determine who picks what channel, but it should definitely be possible to get one that doesn't overlap.
Linksys + Broadband + Vonage = cheap phone (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Linksys + Broadband + Vonage = cheap phone (Score:4, Funny)
through your phone line...
which is provided by...
Verizon.
*SIGH*
Not entirely accurate... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Not entirely accurate... (Score:2, Funny)
KFG
Very important story (Score:5, Interesting)
Linksys is a hardware company. They make money by selling hardware. By opening up the software (and making their hardware "hackable"), they will increase their hardware sales.
My hope is that other hardware companies (you name 'em: ATI, nVidia, Intel, Broadcom, Logitech, etc. etc.) will see this, and make their drivers (and associated software) open-source, thereby making their products "hackable" ==> increased sales.
I hope the "media" will take note of this, and put it out in plain words so that the PHBs who make the decisions will learn the lesson.
Re:Very important story (Score:2, Interesting)
Linksys is now owned by Cisco Systems, who considers themselves to be a software company.
Re:Very important story (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Very important story (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Very important story (Score:2)
NOT!
Not quite (Score:5, Insightful)
That's a very simplistic view of the world and one that only works if the hardware manufacturer only sells a single product or has large jumps in capabilities between products within a family. Suppose Linksys intended to supply many of these features in a more expensive (i.e. more profitable) version of the router. They're now hosed as it is now possible for users to upgrade their firmware for free. So sure, they sell more of the cheaper routers, but this is not what they want. This problem will occur anywhere hardware manufacturers try to take advantage of hardware commonality and differentiating similar products through software based features.
Another potential issue is fighting "cloners". If Taiwanese company CloneCo now has easy access to the software feature set, they "merely" have to develop a clone architecture to run the now readily available software.
Re:Not quite (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Not quite (Score:3, Interesting)
- "Network Everywhere" which is now being called "Network Everywhere by Linksys"... which is for generic-level parts such as basic NIC cards and dumb hubs. You'll find this line at Wal*Mart, and it's Cisco's entry into the low-end market.
- "Linksys" is aimed at the advanced home consumer. The trademark here is the "blue box" which is stackable, but not directly rackable. (There are a few rack-mount Linksys products, those are exceptions to the rule because
Re:Very important story (Score:2)
If there are highly features in this router software that nobody else has and Linksys releases it, they've just saved their competitors time. This analysis works even better when thinking about NVidia / ATI.
Cheers
Re:Very important story (Score:5, Insightful)
The updates bring a whole new level of functionality Linksys couldn't be bothered to incorporate.
From the parent post:
There's a very important lesson hidden in here, which I hope the other hardware vendors will see and take note.
Why would they, when the story gets picked up by the open source community (represented here by Slashdot) and is immediately regurgitated using phrasing which insults a company that is actually doing something we like? Perhaps other people see it differently, but if I were a Linksys person reading this, I'd be pretty bugged by the "couldn't be bothered" cheap shot. Especially for a product that is apparently under a hundred bucks [amazon.com].
Not so much, actually (Score:3, Interesting)
Soooo, Cisco actually has an intrest in seeing that the stuff they sell as Linksys does not start to compete with their bigger stuff they sell as tehmselves. Often the difference is mainly
Re:Very important story (Score:2)
What's the benefit? What would you like to be able to do that the current setup doesn't allow?
Re:Very important story (Score:2)
I'd like to add Canon to this list. I'd really really like to be able to increase the functionality of my 300D Rebel.
Most of the cameras all use the same internal processing system that they've been touting so highly. It seems like in one fell swoop you could cover lots of the different hardware models.
Re:Very important story (Score:2)
Generally, I don't put a lot of faith in Open Source projects, but Rockbox is a great example of OSS done right.
--D
Linksys (Score:5, Interesting)
Now, if only Linksys could release proper Linux drivers for there other wireless goods. At the moment they are all useless to Linux users.
Re:Linksys (Score:2, Informative)
If that number is X, it's now X+1 - I just ordered one to replace my Belkin wireless router, which replaced the Netgear router that started giving off "the Brown Smell" before dying completely.
Why? The Belkin is a nice piece of kit, but it doesn't have the features I need. The Netgear had most of the features, and was actually pretty okay. The Linksys doesn't have the features I need, but looking at the ha
Comcast Users: (Score:5, Insightful)
Couldn't be bothered to incorporate? (Score:5, Insightful)
Thanks for the link to the modifications you couldn't be bothered to make for me, Aaron. I guess I'll have to go buy a Linksys, since you couldn't be bothered with buying one for me.
Nice little anti-corporate jab there. Linksys builds good solid stuff for a reasonable price, and all you can do is complain that it doesn't do everything.
Different routers? (Score:4, Interesting)
Or is there just something inherently more hackable about that Linksys router?
Re:Different routers? (Score:2)
I have a Netgear RT314, and it can be managed via telnet, no problems.
Not correct (Score:2)
Totally untrue. I have or had 4 routers (RT311/314 and the MR314 and one other whose model# escapes me now) and they were all accessable via Telnet AND serial (nice since you don't have to reset the unit just in case you totally muck up the ip address). Now if by telnet you mean you can't just be plopped into a shell, then you're sorta right (though you do have access to the command line from the admin menu).
Source for netgear is here: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Different routers? (Score:5, Informative)
You can download a bundle of the packages it uses from netgear but they are not configured so its
hard to patch or hack with it cos you'd have to
redo their work.
This seems at odds with the GPL , on the grounds
that if you use GPL'ed code you must publish not
just the original source but your modifications as well . or am i wrong ?
The firmware upgrade patch is easily dissasembled and i've managed to hack the file system (cramfs) out of the firmware . So there is a possiblilty
that modifying the filesystem might open up safer
modification by making telnet accessable. but i'm
too much of a chicken to try it and i expect the
checksum would fail.
What about 6to4 tunneling? (Score:5, Interesting)
I didn't see one feature mentioned that I'd really, really like to see added to these boxes: an IPv6 6to4 tunnel. This is an ideal way to penetrate a NAT so you can establish direct TCP connections (and speak UDP) to any servers on your LAN from the outside. IPv6 support has been in all of the major operating systems for some time now, including Windows XP, Linux and Mac OS X, and while not every application is IPv6 ready, the important ones (like SSH) already are.
If 6to4 tunneling could be added to these consumer routers alongside IPv4 NAT, IPv6 stands to really take off without any help whatsoever from the ISPs. In fact, I almost prefer that my ISP not implement native IPv6. I like the fact that they now carry my encapsulated IPv6 packets without any ingress filtering, port blocking or other end-to-end-wrecking nonsense, and that they are oblivious to (much less control) the IPv6 address space. If or when the ISPs do implement native IPv6, you can bet that they'll exercise the same degree of arbitrary control that they now do over IPv4.
Re:What about 6to4 tunneling? (Score:2)
This is exactly what the world needs to get on board IPv6. Somebody needs to create a stable version of the firmware, with good support for IPv6, and easy to install & configure. i.e. You run a program on your desktop, and it automatically upgrades & configures the router for the new firmware.
Re:What about 6to4 tunneling? (Score:5, Informative)
For windows, go to your network configuration. Find your lan, and enable their IPv6 driver. XP only.(SP1 only?) I believe it self configures to use anycast, so that should be it.
Mac....do not know. I assume something along the lines of what linux does will work.
Good luck.
Re:What about 6to4 tunneling? (Score:2)
This will certainly ... (Score:5, Interesting)
This will certainly move a lot a hardware for linksys. Look at the Rockbox mods for Archos for another example. Those who think that you can't make money off the GPL are wrong, at least in the case of hardware makers GPL'ing their firmware. (Although they didn't have a choice since they used linux as the firmware.)
Their was a story awhile back here on slashdot [slashdot.org] that discussed that Intel didn't want to release open source drivers for Centrino. They should. Open source drivers and firmware can be a boon to hardware makers.Thats pretty cool and all, but (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Thats pretty cool and all, but (Score:3)
OPENWRT! (Score:4, Informative)
http://openwrt.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net]
No source code - OPENWRT (Score:2)
Works great (Score:4, Informative)
The newer revs of firmware will have WDS [domino.mms.de] which allows the routers to bridge to each other and client devices to connect to them. However, I think it does half the throughput.
I just got Vonage, and I plan using Wondershaper once these firmwares mature a little bit more.
-prator
Re:Works great (Score:3, Interesting)
No shit? I've got a WRT54G and Cisco told me that you can NOT connect 2 of them wirelessly.. I'm currently running wires to my neighbor's apartments to share the line (and network our xboxes, and systems, etc) Is this the latest LINKSYS firmware that allowed you to set it as a client? If not, what did you use? This could be -extremely- hel
Re:Works great (Score:4, Funny)
The second method is to use WDS and link two AP mode WRT54G's point-to-point.
Please do a search on the Sveasoft forums for more info (http://www.sveasoft.com/forums.html).
WRT55AG (Score:3, Interesting)
New Industry? (Score:5, Interesting)
how about mesh routing? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:how about mesh routing? (Score:2)
Then it would be much easier to create all these advanced features, instead of having everyone adding their own single extra features, and never getting the exposure neccesary to stabilize the feature.
Re:how about mesh routing? (Score:4, Informative)
Mesh routing is on the list of things to do with some progress being made in that direction already.
WRT54G Mesh is on it's way! (Score:3, Informative)
New Business Model (Score:5, Funny)
All kidding aside, here's the business model for 2004:
Open wireless nets (Score:4, Interesting)
1. Limit bandwidth from unauthorized users to a fraction of the connection the owner is paying for (eg xDSL)
2. Route all traffic from unauthorized users through the gateway (eg xDSL router)
3. Block unauthorized access to port 25 to avoid spam from people on the street.
That way we could all share our internet connections and read our email when travelling without the hassle of commercial hotspots.
Guest visiting us could use our networks without exchange of keys and passwords.
BSD has already done this! (Score:2, Interesting)
Mobile computing (Score:5, Interesting)
- The WRT54G only uses a few watts, whereas the PC based router spiked at 300W during startup and consumed north of 60W at idle and south of 100W during load. I also lost between 10-30% of the power due to conversion losses from the DC-AC-DC conversion through the auto inverter, since I couldn't find a good ATX power supply that ran on DC that I could couple to the car's batteries...
- The WRT54G has dual antenna jacks that I don't need to buy delicate adapters or pigtails for. I couple them directly to the jacks on twin high gain 2.4GHz dipole magmounts on the roof of the car, which gives me way better reception than I was getting from the orinoco, a pigtail, and a single one of the same antennas.
- Speaking of reception, kismet has been ported to the WRT54G! I don't need to screw around with the orinoco patches or hack my prism2 cards to add an antenna jack; it just works. I currently feed wifi data from the WRT54G to another computer which actually merges the GPS data with the wifi data from the WRT54G, because the WRT54G only has 4MB flash and 32K NVRAM for persistent storage, and you have to solder a USB serial chipset to the WRT54G PCB to add a serial port to it (for reading GPS's NMEA output); it doesn't come with one.
- Now that sveasoft added dropbear to their latest firmware, you can ssh into the device and run wakeonlan to power up other devices on your network remotely. This is seriously cool shit; I park my car, it associates with my home AP in client mode and shows up on my home network. I can then ssh into the WRT54G to power up the other computers in the car using wakeonlan to transfer files to them (transfer rate is somewhere around 1 megabyte per second in my environment), start the car, use the TNC in the car's ham radio, etc. I had to turn off the PC based router I was using before because it would drain the deep cycle marine batteries I'm using to power the car computers in an hour or two at load, but now I can leave the WRT54G on for a few days before the batteries even get low.
- If I forget where I parked my car, the antennas I'm using for the WRT54G are +6dBi, so I can pull out something with 802.11{b,g} and warwalk the parking lot looking for a strong signal from the WRT54G
- It's only $80 brand new around here in the bay area, which is damn cheap for a low power 200MHz Linux box with 16MB of memory, FIVE ethernet jacks, your choice of DC or AC power, pretty lights, official vendor provided source code for the firmware, an active community hacking on it, and a 802.11g capable wifi chipset with diversity antennas in form factor half the size of the smallest mini-ITX machine you can possibly get. And they're on the used market for prices approaching numbers that make me want to say it's close to disposable pricing. Heh, disposable routers
Hacked firmware concerns (Score:5, Insightful)
...I then tried various versions of the Linksys firmware to no avail. Eventually I stumbled across http://h.vu.wifi-box.net [wifi-box.net] and found a hacked firmware upgrade that fixed the problem but I have serious reservations about using this for my client!
I have no access to the source code so how do I know whether or not this hacked upgrade monitors outgoing connections and passes interesting bits of information on to the author?
Certainly I could sniff the wire and find out for sure but I don't have time for this!!! There's tremendous potential for a malicious third party to monitor traffic using this. It just makes me leery when there's no source code to preview. Even if there was, I don't have the time to review it!
Any similar thoughts/concerns?
slash 22 (Score:4, Funny)
Dlink DWL-900AP+ Power over Ethernet (POE) Hack (Score:3, Interesting)
Ralph Fowler [wwwralphfowler.com] PoE hacked Dlink DWL-900AP+ [ralphfowler.com]. Tons of photos and some brave soldering.
MacOS refugee, paper MCSE, Linux Wanna-be
WRT54G hacking group (Score:3, Informative)
DaveC
Re:i'd like to know (Score:2, Informative)
Cisco products are expensive but pretty damn stable.
Your "open source" comment is stupid, Cisco uses ASICs and other hardware level goop for much of their routing. Unless you're going to open a chip fab plant and start open sourcing your chips... need I say more? (There are some exeptions, ala the Cisco PIX 525 firewall, basically a PC motherboard with some custom stuff for failover etc.)
"Open Source cures cancer!" blah blah blah Use the right tool for the job, you won't paint yourself into a corner and
Re:more hardware restrictions? (Score:2)
If Linksys could even go to the length of supporting a development community around their product, and they would have a bunch of extra features for free, since its all GPL. Plus they would entice those developers to buy Linksys, instead of Microsoft or Netgear.
Re:more hardware restrictions? (Score:5, Interesting)
The fact that their hardware can be upgraded with an unauthorized firmware image actually helps their business. First off, the fact that their hardware is customizable helps sell more hardware to geeks (who in turn recommend their hardware to friends, family, and clients). Secondly, using an unauthorized firmware voids the warranty, which saves them money -- if you flash it and break it, you're screwed. If you flash it and a component fails for a totally unreleated reason, they don't have to give you a free replacement; you'll have to buy a new one, so they still come out ahead.
This is a very different situation than things like the Dakota Digital camera hack or the i-opener hack. In those cases, the companies involved were/are selling the hardware at a loss as an incentive to get you to use a paid service. In these cases, hacking the hardware eliminates the need to use the service, thereby disrupting their business plan and letting you use the subsidised hardware for an unintended purpose. Linksys sells their hardware for a profit. Hacking it does nothing to disrupt their business plan, because they already made all the money they planned to make when the wholesaler bought a truckload of their hardware.