The Sovereignty Puzzle

Software vs. Hardware in the Quest for Digital Control

One of the comments on my last post in social media nailed it: "It's not your software if it's not on your hardware." That one line cuts to the core of digital sovereignty - and raises a deeper question: what really makes hardware yours?

The Transparency Gap

The divide between software and hardware sovereignty is stark:

• Software: Open-source code can be audited, modified, and rebuilt. Users or communities can verify, patch, or fork it when needed. Transparency is built in.
• Hardware: Most chip designs are proprietary. Few vendors publish schematics or RTL designs. We rely on supply chains and opaque silicon we can't inspect or verify.

The Vulnerability Divide

This gap grows wider when things break:

• Software bugs can be fixed with an update.
• Hardware flaws often require a full redesign - if they're even disclosed.

For example, Intel and AMD chips include hidden microcontrollers (like Intel ME or AMD PSP) running secret, unpatchable firmware. Firmware like BIOS or BMC is typically signed and locked, not shared. Trust is demanded, not earned.

The Verification Wall

Software enables reproducible builds, peer review, and independent validation. Hardware? Much harder. Even when CPU designs are open (e.g., HDL cores), there's no easy way to prove the physical chip matches the source. And hardware backdoors or defects can slip through undetected - even in open designs.

The Path Forward

Total transparency and control may be unattainable - but we can build resilient, layered systems:

• Use hardware with open firmware (e.g., Coreboot)
• Support open hardware efforts: RISC-V, MNT Reform, Talos II
• Reduce reliance on black-box components (e.g., disable Intel ME if possible)
• Choose platforms with strong community documentation

Pairing open software with the most verifiable hardware available minimizes risks and creates fail-safes when trust breaks down.

This isn't just a personal challenge - it's a societal one.

Communities, including entire nations, need to act. Just as Switzerland promotes open-source software to strengthen autonomy and resilience, we must extend the same incentives to open hardware. Public funding, procurement policies, and research support can accelerate open hardware adoption - and reduce dependence on opaque, foreign-controlled tech stacks.

True digital sovereignty rests not just in source code, but in silicon. If we want systems we can trust, we need both open software and open hardware. The latter is harder to build, but just as essential.