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

171–180 of 428 posts

Re: Right to root access

#171

Post by xorcist »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #45
stavros wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And consumers can have that. That doesn't mean I should be unable to unlock my phone and do whatever I want with it.

The problem is not the ability to unlock your phone. The problem is that 90% of people unlocking their phones will either be for piracy (against the company’s interests), or against the customer's own interests (stalkerware, data extraction, sale of stolen devices). There is a reason malware is over 50 times as prevalent on Android.

Where does the 50x figure come from and what types of malware does it include? It doesn't really match neither my experience or pricing on the grey exploit market.

Malware has a wide definition however, and if you include all the spyware included with phones that aren't sold outside China and to a degree also India, you could probably hit that mark. But as they aren't allowed to access Google services or the official Play store, it's also a bit misleading.

Re: Right to root access

#172

Post by metalman »

femiagbabiaka wrote: post #118
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…

half of those things have computers in them now

my fuel injected chain saw, has a data port, but luckily, my back woods repair shop showed me the computerless,seasonal re-tune procedure that only requires a stop watch, works a charm As to other devices....phones, we need a whole re write of the privacy and publishing laws, to allow each person to regulate themselves. With an ultra basic "standard" set up for the masses who do want to be entertained, while having buying "oportunites" presented to them. But it has to be consentual, and basics like a phone number, email address, and personal/comercial web space, a non alienable birth right.Ban utopian concepts outright, and get back to bieng the quarlsome and somewhat violent species, that we are. I am starting to wonder, is the root cause of all of the ancient civilisations, lying in there own dust, what we are doing now, and the vast echoing silence from the stars, the same.

Re: Right to root access

#173

Post by raxxor »

jmb99 wrote: post #133
yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should a software vendor be allowed to say what I can and can't run on my machine?

Because it’s their software? It is well within your bank’s rights to deny you access to their online banking system for pretty much any (technical) reason they choose; why are you entitled to run their app on what they deem to be an insecure platform? If you don’t like it, either pick a different bank or deal with not having access to their software. Freedom cuts both ways here; if you want absolute freedom to do wha…

They do have that right as long as they do not sabotage the integrity of the system. Personally I would quickly use other software developers and banks. Competition would sort that out quickly.

Today banks don't want to be liable for user error that lead to scams. They adhere to such policies out of fear, but they don't help as the most prominent victims of scams are still the same people, open system or not.

Re: Right to root access

#174

Post by miki123211 »

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…

> There are a ton of products on the market that are vastly more dangerous than computers

The thing with chainsaws and motorcycles is that they look and feel dangerous, and people have an intuitive understanding of how to approach those dangers.

If you ask a random person on the street about safe motorcycle riding, they'll probably tell you about respecting speed limits, wearing protective gear, only doing it when sober, not pulling stunts / showing off etc. I've never been on a motorcycle, have 0 interest in them, and I know those things.

Computers don't work that way. People can't distinguish between a real banking app and a fake banking app that looks real, an update pop-up and a fake "you need to update Adobe Flash Player" pop-up on a phishing website etc.

I've done plenty of "helping non-technical people out with computers" during my middle / secondary school days. That was when people still used Windows a lot, as opposed to doing everything on their phones. Most computers I've seen back then had some app that hijacked your start page, changed your search engine to something strange, would constantly open random websites with "dpwnload now free wallpapers and ring tones for your mobile now" etc. You didn't even have to fall for a scam to get something like that, plenty of reputable software came with such "add-ons", because that's how you made money back then.

I feel like that era of "total freedom" has somehow been erased from our minds, and we're looking at things through rose-tinted glasses. I, for one, vastly prefer the world of personalized ads and invasive surveillance over one where I constantly have to be on alert for my default browser being changed to Google Chrome for the hundredth time this year, just because I decided to update Skype.

Re: Right to root access

#175

Post by palata »

jopsen wrote: post #144

> I believe consumers, as a right, should be able to install software of their choosing to any computing device that is owned outright. That's easy to say, but hard to legislate, and impossible to enforce. There is so much firmware around, small binary blobs burned into micro controllers that can't even be updated. Or that isn't intended to be updated. There are probably even dimmable LED bulbs without IoT features t…

> and impossible to enforce.

You don't have to enforce it for every single manufacturer and every single product. If you enforce it for Apple, Samsung and a couple other big Android brands, you'll get most smartphones.

Now whether it is a good idea or not, I don't know. But if you wanted to enforce it, I think it wouldn't be too hard. Banks get a ton of regulations and have to apply them all the time. Surely Apple or Samsung could do that, too.

Re: Right to root access

#176

Post by sans_souse »

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…

You can stop saying this now, those numbers (of ignorant users) no longer serves the argument. We did our job in informing the majority.

Re: Right to root access

#177

Post by alias_neo »

stavros wrote: post #156
alias_neo wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's say for a second it was accurate (It's probably not), perhaps it's because Android has a far higher market share globally, and it's much cheaper and easier to get started writing apps (or malware) for Android than say iOS. You also don't need to buy a single device from Google to get started. You can take the PC you're at and get started right away, and publish that app (or malware) without spending a penny (th…

Yeah, agreed. This "I don't want to own my things because I want Big Brother to protect me" attitude is really frustrating, especially when you can have protection without Google holding all the keys. GrapheneOS isn't less secure than stock Android.

It's a kind of madness people only have towards our (technology/IT) industry.

I don't know if it's because they don't understand it, and that's scary, so they think it's safer for the big boys to hold the keys, but imagine if people acted the same in other contexts?

"The bank should keep hold of the keys because otherwise I might accidentally lock myself out, or lose my keys, or leave the door unlocked for a bad guy to come in and steal my stuff".

That's fine if you can't trust yourself to look after them, let someone else handle your keys for you, perhaps someone "trust worthy" could offer it as a service, but I'll keep my keys in my own pocket thanks.

Re: Right to root access

#178

Post by grishka »

miki123211 wrote: post #174
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…

> There are a ton of products on the market that are vastly more dangerous than computers The thing with chainsaws and motorcycles is that they look and feel dangerous, and people have an intuitive understanding of how to approach those dangers. If you ask a random person on the street about safe motorcycle riding, they'll probably tell you about respecting speed limits, wearing protective gear, only doing it when so…

> You didn't even have to fall for a scam to get something like that, plenty of reputable software came with such "add-ons", because that's how you made money back then.

That's why you never blindly clicked "next" in installers. Everyone got one of those IE toolbars accidentally at some point, but it usually only took doing it once to learn the lesson.

Re: Right to root access

#179

Post by grishka »

lrvick wrote: post #25

I detest Google, but I do think they made the right call with Android devices and Chromebooks. You can unlock either as long as you are willing to totally wipe the device first and start over as a new device under a new security context. This removes the risk of this being abused to compromise the data of stolen devices or evil maid attacks unless a user that knows what they are doing has explicitly opted themselves…

The problem with bootloader unlocking on modern Android devices is that they have a hypervisor that you don't get to ever unlock but that will snitch on you and make some apps, like some banking ones, refuse to work because the "integrity" of your device could not be verified. In other words, because these apps can no longer be certain they are able to hide data from you the device owner.

Magisk exists, yes, but it's a flimsy temporary solution. It only works because it's able to lie to Google that your device doesn't support hardware attestation. As soon as Google starts requiring that all devices support hardware attestation, it will stop working.

Re: Right to root access

#180

Post by throw0101a »

raxxor wrote: post #160
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…

If protection of the casual user was an argument, there would be an easy option to unlock your system, be that phones or desktop computers. But on many systems these options do not exist because the vendor likes people dependent on them. This is why devices like chromebooks or all mobile phones are more or less e-waste in the making. In my opinion it is a waste to use any development capacity for these systems apart…

> If protection of the casual user was an argument, there would be an easy option to unlock your system, be that phones or desktop computers.

Making it easy to unlock could make it easy(er) for scammers to get it unlocked:

> I received the same type of call a little later in the day. They were very adamant they were calling from the Bell data centre, on a terrible line and I made them call back three more times while I considered their requests. They wanted to have me download a program that would have given them controI of my laptop. […]

* https://forum.bell.ca/t5/Internet/Call-stating-that-an-issue...

Post reply on HN