alt Hacker News> Even the RFSoC docs from AMD/Xilinx are better written
This project isn't meant to be vendor-quality documentation of the chipset. It's a reverse engineering project that succeeded and included enough documentation to build upon.
Comparing a freely shared reverse engineering proof of concept to vendor-provided 1st party documentation is a ridiculous high bar.
This is a cool project that was just shared hours ago. Criticizing it for not being 1st party vendor documentation quality is a really bad faith criticism.
Okay. So let's pretend it is simple a proof-of-concept (PoC) rather than a full blown project, it's opening paragraph in README.md is:
"Turns a Gemtek W1700K Wi-Fi 7 router into a wideband software-defined receiver. The router's MediaTek MT7996 radio captures raw 14-bit IQ at up to 320 Msps, its Airoha AN7581 SoC streams it over 10 GbE, and a Linux host shows it as a live spectrum and waterfall in the browser, with the receiver's controls next to it."
Does that read paragraph say "Hey check out this PoC!" to you?
So a human, used Claude code to reverse engineer a device. Fine, let THAT be the readme. If it had said, "This is something that was accomplished with Claude code reverse engineering this thing, I have no idea how it works, but that it does work is evidenced by the spectrum I can show."
For those of us who are "skilled in the art" as they say, this reads like "Hey check this out, I bypassed the paywall by putting in my Mom's credit card number!" The lede here is that Claude can reverse engineer things. That was most informatively shown with an article that showed up here titled "All the things I own, owned."
The comment I replied to simply said, "Thanks Claude." Which is droll, but accurate. And, for me, the criticism of showing off something you "did" with a tool you don't understand and whose outputs you don't understand, reminds me strongly of the script kiddies of the 90's and naughts who would boldly proclaim "Hey, check it out, I got root on <website>." when all they had done was run Metasploit and walked through a bunch of scripts until they hit an RCE vulnerability and then used it to gain root (with another script).
So at some point the vendor will go through and patch the holes which the model had exploited and they will have to rewrite their admin architecture, and maybe be liable to some fines with the chip companies if "Intellectual Property" was improperly disclosed by their failure to write good software. And are we any closer to using the products as a general purpose SDR? No, we are not.
Contrast that with the folks who reverse engineered the RealTek DVB-T tuner chip, and had an understanding of what they had done and how it worked, and it spawned a bunch of RTL-SDR dongles that introduced lots of people to SDRs.
It is a really cool project, and it is an interesting proof of concept which could be the starting point for reverse engineering these boxes. But the author chose to present it as a complete ready to go project with documentation of things like their "architecture."
I suspect it is also true that neither the author, and certainly not the large language model, has any idea about how this firmware even works.