Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Right to root access

medhir.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 428 posts

Re: Right to root access

#121

Post by LocalH »

emmelaich wrote: post #21
Palomides wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"everyone is too stupid to be trusted with general purpose computers" is a pretty grim position to hold

You left out the vital clause. "... if they have total unfettered control". Also, not everyone. Obviously. It's a position I came to rather regretfully and sadly.

How do you propose we limit access to general-purpose computing without doing so across the board for everyone? How would you block bad actors from general-purpose computing? Require licensing to use development tools, and track what they're used for so you can react when someone crosses that "line"? Congratulations, you've just destroyed computing.

Re: Right to root access

#122

Post by cynicalsecurity »

We should thank all the major copyright holders for that. They are the reason many devices have been crippled. Because for them, the real enemy is the user, - that is you, my dear friend. They assume you to be a criminal by default, you know, like some crazy feminists assume all men are rapists just because they have a penis. Chop your penis off to prove you are not a rapist! Use your device without root access to prove you are not a filthy pirate who is "stealing" money from poor copyright holders who can barely afford women, yaughts and coke they are used to.

Re: Right to root access

#123

Post by realusername »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #48
do_not_redeem wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The average customer wants a car that doesn't explode because you installed a sketchy spark plug. Does that mean the manufacturers should install locks on the hood of every new car, with the threat of jail time if you pick the lock and look underneath?

A sketchy spark plug does not have the ability to make a car explode, so the analogy is pointless. On that note, even if someone stole your car, at least your car does not have access to your bank account, your passwords, your messages, and even your sexual history. The personal and reputational cost of losing a car is not comparable. Many people would actually probably prefer their car to be stolen than the contents…

> I think a more accurate comparison would be to an electrician. In Australia, doing your own electrical work is a crime even for the homeowner

In this comparison Google and Apple have the role of the government, if you believe that argument, that also implies that you believe they should be broken apart for antitrust

Re: Right to root access

#124

Post by oneshtein »

emmelaich wrote: post #65
qmr wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stupidest take I've seen today. There are already myriad unlockable devices. What a bizarre fantasy you have constructed.

Let me clarify .. if you have an unlocked device, then software vendors should be able to ensure that their software is non-functional on such a device. Given that, then anything very useful would be rendered non-functional, resulting in the device probably being useless.

The vendor can install a Trojan horse on every phone, then activate it silently when his customers does something suspicious. It also very useful feature for law enforcement agencies and foreign spies.

Re: Right to root access

#125

Post by oneshtein »

nirui wrote: post #114
gjsman-1000 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a very popular HN opinion; but not a very popular real world opinion. The average customer wants a device that works consistently, every day, that is easy to use, with a collection of 3rd party apps who won’t steal their life savings. Windows failed to deliver this; the average customer never downloads an Exe from a newer publisher without terror. The average consumer is literally dozens of times more likely…

> The average customer wants a device that works consistently, every day, that is easy to use And it can only be archived with a fully locked down hardware? Of course not. The modern OS archives system security through permission and isolation, which don't require bootlock etc to work. In fact, it worked well too even after the device is unlocked & rooted. > Windows failed to deliver this; the average customer never…

Android is Linux. :-/

Re: Right to root access

#126

Post by lukevp »

oneshtein wrote: post #125
nirui wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The average customer wants a device that works consistently, every day, that is easy to use And it can only be archived with a fully locked down hardware? Of course not. The modern OS archives system security through permission and isolation, which don't require bootlock etc to work. In fact, it worked well too even after the device is unlocked & rooted. > Windows failed to deliver this; the average customer never…

Android is Linux. :-/

Android is built on top of Linux. Android the OS has a lot of permissions layers between an app and the bare metal.

Re: Right to root access

#127

Post by mattclarkdotnet »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #48
do_not_redeem wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The average customer wants a car that doesn't explode because you installed a sketchy spark plug. Does that mean the manufacturers should install locks on the hood of every new car, with the threat of jail time if you pick the lock and look underneath?

A sketchy spark plug does not have the ability to make a car explode, so the analogy is pointless. On that note, even if someone stole your car, at least your car does not have access to your bank account, your passwords, your messages, and even your sexual history. The personal and reputational cost of losing a car is not comparable. Many people would actually probably prefer their car to be stolen than the contents…

It’s not a crime to do your own electrical work in Australia, it just invalidates your insurance unless you get the work signed off. The websites saying it “could be illegal” strangely never reference the actual law you’d breach.

Re: Right to root access

#128

Post by mattclarkdotnet »

seszett wrote: post #100
gjsman-1000 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A sketchy spark plug does not have the ability to make a car explode, so the analogy is pointless. On that note, even if someone stole your car, at least your car does not have access to your bank account, your passwords, your messages, and even your sexual history. The personal and reputational cost of losing a car is not comparable. Many people would actually probably prefer their car to be stolen than the contents…

> In Australia, doing your own electrical work is a crime even for the homeowner, because it can cause physical death, and is too likely to be done wrong. Yes, you will possibly go to jail for replacing $2 light switches And do you find this reasonable, and a good thing to expand to smartphone use?

It’s bullshit, there are no laws banning you from replacing a light switch in Australia. At worst you might invalidate your home insurance.

Re: Right to root access

#129

Post by emmelaich »

oneshtein wrote: post #124
emmelaich wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me clarify .. if you have an unlocked device, then software vendors should be able to ensure that their software is non-functional on such a device. Given that, then anything very useful would be rendered non-functional, resulting in the device probably being useless.

The vendor can install a Trojan horse on every phone, then activate it silently when his customers does something suspicious. It also very useful feature for law enforcement agencies and foreign spies.

You have to trust the vendor. You have no choice.

You cannot personally tell whether it is trustworthy or not.

Re: Right to root access

#130

Post by tliltocatl »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #40
lapcat wrote: post #32

There are a ton of products on the market that are vastly more dangerous than computers: guns, cars, motorcycles, bicycles, chainsaws, table saws, cigarettes, alcohol, junk food. Yes, consumers do sometimes harm themselves by using these products. That's the price of freedom . I think it's bizarre that we treat computers as the most dangerous products in the world that for some reason demand paternalism, when none of…

This is a very popular HN opinion; but not a very popular real world opinion. The average customer wants a device that works consistently, every day, that is easy to use, with a collection of 3rd party apps who won’t steal their life savings. Windows failed to deliver this; the average customer never downloads an Exe from a newer publisher without terror. The average consumer is literally dozens of times more likely…

The average customer only exists in marketing people's heads.
Post reply on HN