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

191–200 of 428 posts

Re: Right to root access

#191

Post by logicchains »

invalidlogin wrote: post #187
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…

A chainsaw does not introduce an opportunity for thousands of remote criminals to steal money from your bank account.

But like a gun or a knife it may give local criminals an opportunity to threaten (or worse) you into giving them money from your wallet.

Re: Right to root access

#192

Post by frizlab »

DoubleGlazing wrote: post #189
frizlab wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you know you don’t have root access before buying. Why would you buy it if you want root access?

I'm willing to stand corrected, but I can't think of a single smartphone on the market from a reputable manufacturer that is sold with root access. If I want a smartphone I have to accept that the manufacturer will have the bootloader locked down, I don't have a choice.

I have zero experience in the android world, but a quick search tells me that Xiaomi Devices, Google Pixel Phones, OnePlus Devices, Redmi Note 4, Samsung Devices and MediaTek Devices at least are rootable, with some rules with various degrees of freedom for the procedure (in particular warranty is voided pretty much all the time when device is rooted).

Re: Right to root access

#194

Post by p_ing »

stavros wrote: post #50
p_ing wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that is exactly what the author is saying, wanting government regulation. For one, the government won't simply say "keep the device open for the end user" (or a "smart" government wouldn't), but even if they did, you've now opened that device to any attacker, law enforcement included.

So because I can sudo on my computer, my computer is open to any attacker? What's wrong with this comments section? Has anyone here used a computer before?

What does the operating system have to do with an attacker? What's wrong with this comments section? Has anyone seen Israeli offline attacks of iPhones before?

Re: Right to root access

#195

Post by scarface_74 »

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.

It came out in the Apple vs Epic trial that 90% of all App Store revenue comes from in app purchase for games - mostly pay to win games.

If they all went out of business, nothing of value would be loss.

Then you have apps that are free clients for services.

There is very little legitimate money being made by mobile from people actually buying apps

Re: Right to root access

#196

Post by xorcist »

lukevp wrote: post #126
oneshtein wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Still, those permissions are standard Linux permissions. So the argument that Linux is less secure than Android is a little hard to understand. A little more specificity might help.

Re: Right to root access

#197

Post by cube2222 »

solatic wrote: post #101

The way to balance security and freedom is with a hardware switch. By default, keep secure boot etc. But if someone opens the case, takes out the battery, and moves a little switch on the board? Start with a fresh, unprotected context. Because it's a hardware switch, it can't be remotely hacked. An adversary who gets the hardware anyway can get control (are we going to pretend otherwise?). So just do the right thing…

> are we going to pretend otherwise?

aren't we in fact pretending otherwise?

Right now I believe that stolen iPhones are effectively bricks (barring state-level actors with unpatched zero-days)?

Re: Right to root access

#198

Post by BeFlatXIII »

emmelaich wrote: post #16

I used to think this way but then I saw how non-techy people use their devices. Something like this would inevitably be abused and result in wave of malware so massive that it would render the internet too hostile for all but the most careful, knowledgable and paranoid users.

Good. Boot the normies offline again. Bring back the glory days of the internet being an exclusive club of nerds.

Re: Right to root access

#199

Post by fiso64 »

therealmarv wrote: post #193

Banking, some government and crypto apps on Android think: no They sometimes actively search for root evidence.

I'm actually confused about why banks are so aggressive in denying users the ability to use their apps while rooted. Unlike Google and Apple I can't think of any financial incentives for this, and the security argument is quite obviously nonsense, as I don't think there has been a single person in history who managed to fall for a scam that made them follow the complicated procedure of rooting a smartphone. Nevertheless there is a clear continuous effort in developing new root detection methods to keep me from using their apps.

Re: Right to root access

#200

Post by BeFlatXIII »

jmb99 wrote: post #140
petesergeant wrote: post #96

Contrarian take: you bought the device, that you knew already did not provide that, from a company who has priced in not having to support rooted devices, and who had priced in your future revenue from extras. The company can't complain if you find a way to root it (and they don't), but they're under no obligation to add in this extra feature you're asking for. If you want a mostly-open handheld device, they're for s…

I agree. The gist of the main arguments I see in this thread are that average people should be trusted to choose whether or not they will unlock their device. Yet, a group of (presumably) some of the most technically savvy people on the internet can’t figure out how to buy open products? If you don’t want a locked-down computer, don’t buy a Mac. Clearly, many, many people do, so why should they have that taken away f…

> If you don’t want a locked-down computer, don’t buy a Mac

I'd be bothered to respect your opinion if there were competitors whose build quality were better than dogshit.

Post reply on HN