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

FTDI removes counterfeit-bricking driver from Windows Update

eevblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 131 posts

Re: FTDI removes counterfeit-bricking driver from Windows Update

#61

Post by nsxwolf »

Karunamon wrote: post #17
jerf wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They really should. Class actions are an inferior mechanism for both parties anyhow. The lawyers sitting in the middle will make it so it's radically more expensive for the company, and the odds of the supposed "winners" of the class action suit will probably get uselessly small vouchers for service rather than actual replacement.

Class actions are less about compensation and more about forming big enough sticks to beat misbehaving corporations about the head with.

And lawyers getting big, fat paydays.

Re: FTDI removes counterfeit-bricking driver from Windows Update

#62

Post by wpietri »

Alupis wrote: post #46
serf wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very easy to spot, as the driver 'bricks' the chip by resetting it's PID.

well, the PID is not a physical thing. So for the average user, "the board just died on my one day". Getting wide-spread testing and evidence submitting would be challenging I think.

I don't see why that would be more challenging than any other class-action suit. Indeed, this looks easier, in that you have widespread media coverage and plenty of experts speaking out publicly. It's not a question of trying to find experts qualified to testify; here, you can pick from a bunch. The technology here is also much more straightforward than, say, an automobile, and there are successful class-action suits involving those all the time.

Re: FTDI removes counterfeit-bricking driver from Windows Update

#63

Post by Vendan »

expr- wrote: post #12

I disagree with the consensus. It's their driver, it operates in a specific way, perhaps responding to possible device output. Using it with non-compatible parts advertising themselves as compatible and any resulting behaviour, including unwanted, is the responsibility of the user. To play it safe, don't use any drivers with incompatible hardware.

It's malicious and intentional.

https://twitter.com/marcan42/status/525202516816842752

Re: FTDI removes counterfeit-bricking driver from Windows Update

#65

Post by Vendan »

hippich wrote: post #64

It mentions Windows, what about other OSes? Does linux/mac need driver? If no - why it works without driver on these OSes?

Cause Linux has drivers that support it already, that are a part of the kernel. Not likely that FTDI'd manage to get the kernel devs to add bricking code like this. Kernel devs already added code to handle devices that had been messed up by the drivers, actually.

Re: FTDI removes counterfeit-bricking driver from Windows Update

#66

Post by jws »

nraynaud wrote: post #41

That's a good lesson for people always wanting the famous brands. FTDI chips are more expensive and not better than the other ones, they need a special driver and they are subject to counterfeiting. You take a no-name one, and you have a standard stuff. It's a stupid USB to RS232, not a rocket control system, there should be no famous brand, it's the lowest of the commodities. That said, I do have an FTDI USB to seri…

The FTDI chips and drivers also have the ability to toggle a few extra pins. If you are making a device this can be important enough to lure you away from just being a generic USB Communications Device Class profile. (Think a 'reset' function or a 'enter firmware update mode' function.)

Given that as a consumer/purchaser I have no way of knowing if I have a counterfeit chip or if the next batch produced by a manufacturer will have them… I now have an incentive to avoid FTDI entirely when given a choice.

Re: FTDI removes counterfeit-bricking driver from Windows Update

#67

Post by hippich »

Vendan wrote: post #65
hippich wrote: post #64

It mentions Windows, what about other OSes? Does linux/mac need driver? If no - why it works without driver on these OSes?

Cause Linux has drivers that support it already, that are a part of the kernel. Not likely that FTDI'd manage to get the kernel devs to add bricking code like this. Kernel devs already added code to handle devices that had been messed up by the drivers, actually.

Then why there is no open source driver for windows which works with non-genuine chips?

Re: FTDI removes counterfeit-bricking driver from Windows Update

#68

Post by Alupis »

wpietri wrote: post #62
Alupis wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

well, the PID is not a physical thing. So for the average user, "the board just died on my one day". Getting wide-spread testing and evidence submitting would be challenging I think.

I don't see why that would be more challenging than any other class-action suit. Indeed, this looks easier, in that you have widespread media coverage and plenty of experts speaking out publicly. It's not a question of trying to find experts qualified to testify; here, you can pick from a bunch. The technology here is also much more straightforward than, say, an automobile, and there are successful class-action suits…

there isn't really any media coverage, other than the forum posts and HN. Also, using your automobile example, an average-joe consumer can take their car into a mechanic and have it tested for a recall/defect. The average-joe with an arduino is far more likely to toss the defective unit out, rather than try to spend a while troubleshooting a $40 board.

I just don't see a class-action really able to take off. Especially since we're talking about otherwise illegal counterfeit chips in the first place.

Re: FTDI removes counterfeit-bricking driver from Windows Update

#69

Post by nknighthb »

Alupis wrote: post #36
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's reasonable, until they start deliberately destroying my property. Then its a civil case. Do we have any evidence either way, deliberate or accidental?

Just playing devil's advocate: Do you have any evidence specifically that their driver destroyed your chip, or could there be reasonable doubt that your counterfeit chip died? For a class-action suit that a lot of people seem to be talking about, you would have to have evidence that this was what did your chip in. And getting enough people (who appear to be mostly end-users) to submit the necessary evidence could be…

> reasonable doubt

Even if such existed (it does not), this standard is not applicable to a civil case, only to the criminal trials for destruction of property/malicious mischief that every single person involved should have to go through.

Re: FTDI removes counterfeit-bricking driver from Windows Update

#70

Post by Vendan »

hippich wrote: post #67
Vendan wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cause Linux has drivers that support it already, that are a part of the kernel. Not likely that FTDI'd manage to get the kernel devs to add bricking code like this. Kernel devs already added code to handle devices that had been messed up by the drivers, actually.

Then why there is no open source driver for windows which works with non-genuine chips?

Because windows drivers need non-trivial amounts of support in the form of driver development kit and driver signing. Then you run into issues with which driver to pull for the chip, cause now you are conflicting with FTDI's driver. Other chips that aren't clones do have their own drivers.
Post reply on HN