Hi Raiden, There is already a reverse-engineered driver for the ESP32: https://github.com/esp32-open-mac/esp32-open-mac
This is what Claude said about this project: "The esp32-open-mac project is the one most people mean by "reverse-engineered ESP32 WiFi driver." Espressif never documented the Wi-Fi hardware peripherals in its public datasheets, so the authors reverse engineered how the hardware works and implemented a minimal MAC layer that can scan channels and connect to an open network. It was funded by NLnet's NGI Zero Core fund from 2023-10 to 2025-11, with financial support from the European Commission." Technically, you can create a clean-room driver for ESP32 WiFi because esp32-open-mac documented the registers. Also according to Claude: "A public EU grant is a reasonable signal that the work is considered legitimate in Europe. That isn't a legal ruling, though." Since Espressif agreed to donate the HAL to ASF maybe they could donate the WiFi driver as well. Since a reverse-engineered driver already exists, their closed-source code won't block other companies from creating competing chips. That was the main reason they decided to keep it closed. BR, Alan On Thu, Oct 8, 2026 at 4:23 AM raiden00pl <[email protected]> wrote: > The ESP HAL includes binary blobs for BLE and Wi-Fi. What happens with > them? > If Espressif transfers rights to Apache, does that mean Apache becomes the > owner > of the binary blobs? Does this imply I can reverse-engineer these binary > blobs > without getting sued? Could I then incorporate the deconstructed code into > the HAL to eliminate the need for the binary blobs? Espressif surely has > agreements > in place with IP core providers for the radios - won't that cause any > issues? > > czw., 8 paź 2026 o 07:33 Alin Jerpelea <[email protected]> napisał(a): > > > Hi all, > > > > sorry for my late reply due to travel > > > > I think that we should handle the HALS case by case > > for Espressif I am happy to hear about this decision and I can only hope > > that they will continue expanding and improving the open source > initiative > > > > I propose that we open a discuss thread for each hal including a link to > > the curent location so that we can discuss howto handle it > > > > in my opinion having hals under ASF and habing HALS on a separate place > as > > suggested by Alan can only bring more posibility for collaboration > > > > @Alan C. de Assis <[email protected]> I think that we should discuss > about > > inviting commiters to PMC (that discussion should be handled on a > separate > > thread on a different channel) > > > > Best regards > > Alin > > > > On Thu, 8 Oct 2026, 04:09 Binh Nguyen, <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I'd like to share my perspective on this topic. > > > > > > First, I'd like to clarify that I have no objection to Espressif's > > > decision. If Espressif is comfortable donating ownership of their HAL > and > > > moving it under ASF infrastructure, I fully respect that choice. > > > > > > Open-source communities are usually built around collaboration, > > > governance, and shared maintenance, not around forcing contributors to > > > transfer ownership of their code. > > > > > > If donating ownership becomes the expected model, we may solve the > > > Espressif case but unintentionally make it harder for other vendors to > > > participate in the future. I believe we should optimize for attracting > > > contributors, not increasing contribution barriers. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Binh > > > > > > > > >
