Live data from Hacker News

Bluetooth Headphone Jacking: A Key to Your Phone [video]

media.ccc.de

211–220 of 228 posts

Re: Bluetooth Headphone Jacking: A Key to Your Phone [video]

#211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why wouldn’t some keyboard manufacturer realize that a lot of people actually do need all of the letters, sell a keyboard with all of them, and make bank? This theory that people want headphone jacks and phone makers won’t provide them makes no sense. It requires phone makers to be so cost conscious that they’ll remove a desirable feature to save a few cents, yet simultaneously so clueless that they won’t take advant…

Why would you make a keyboard with one more letter when everyone is buying ones without? Would you buy a keyboard with a ™ key? If not, why not?

I, for one, only buy ISO keyboards, and not the lesser ANSI ones that lack one key.

Re: Bluetooth Headphone Jacking: A Key to Your Phone [video]

#212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wired headphones have no latency. AptX-LL are rare in the good quality headsets.

This right here, especially for gaming. When I use my Sony XM5 Bluetooth headphones, the latency is noticeable. Watching videos, the lips don't match the audio. Playing games, I see things before I hear them. It's probably in the ~150-200 ms range for latency. While gaming, I use a different set of wireless headphones that use a proprietary dongle. If they have any latency at all, I don't notice it.

On the phone?

Re: Bluetooth Headphone Jacking: A Key to Your Phone [video]

#213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just don’t know a single real person that still wants to use wired earphones with their phone. To me it’s the same as complaining that an artist only has CDs, not records.

Good wired headphones (or in-ear monitors) still sound noticeably better than wireless. This makes a big difference when listening to music.

Makes sense, I guess it comes down to how you use your phone, if it's your primary high fidelity music listening device, then you would totally need an audio jack. My guess is simply that that's the minority of people.

Re: Bluetooth Headphone Jacking: A Key to Your Phone [video]

#214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's a competitive market. Is it ? We have a paper trail of lawsuits telling another story.

Do we?

The whole DMA saga started from Apple being designated a gate keeper.

Re: Bluetooth Headphone Jacking: A Key to Your Phone [video]

#215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The security, performance, usability and reliability of wired headphones will always be superior to wireless. There is just no substitute for the simplicity of an uninterrupted piece of copper carrying an analog signal. The convenience of having no wires simply isn't worth the downgrade in these other aspects.

Your opinion is valid, but irrelevant. The above comment said that you’re a minority and that they’ve never met a person irl that shares your opinion. I can say I’ve also never met anyone who shares that opinion. Also of note is that I used to care a lot about sound quality, and owned very expensive wired IEMs until 2 years ago. I was annoyed when I switched to a phone without a jack, but now I’m used to it and don’t…

> The above comment said that you’re a minority

If we're going to pick nits, no it didn't. And the fact that I'm in a minority (which I definitely am) is what's irrelevant. The comment seemed to be doubting the existence of this preference, and I gave an example of its existence.

Re: Bluetooth Headphone Jacking: A Key to Your Phone [video]

#217
post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt this was ever classified information. It's written all over DoD and NSA requirements and best practices for staff and diplomats. She was probably briefed repeatedly about this as a member of that committee. Here's one example: > Headphones are wired headphones (i.e. not wireless) which can be plugged into a computing device to listen to audio media (e.g. music, Defense Collaboration Services, etc.).[0] [0]: h…

>I doubt this was ever classified information. The classified part would be the intelligence that the wireless protocol is compromised. I don't see that in your document.

That's not intelligence, just a precaution.

Re: Bluetooth Headphone Jacking: A Key to Your Phone [video]

#218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> part of me has always known that bluetooth is just hacks on hacks… I allowed myself to be persuaded due to popularity. Scary. Is it scary? Bluetooth is wildly convenient, and mostly works most of the time. There are definite software issues, and there are security issues, but for most of us, we're not going to run into them that often. (Well, ok - maybe not for most of the people on this site.) I'm going to continu…

I don't know, it seems a little telling that you need this much technology just to beat a wire .

Not really when more and more phones lack audio jacks.

Re: Bluetooth Headphone Jacking: A Key to Your Phone [video]

#219
post #44
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are also some amazing cables available in the space. Especially the digital cables, they are really amazing.

A friend worked in an audiophile shop during his physics master and he'd swear the customer base was the most gullible bunch he ever saw... And mostly unswayable by rational arguments. In any case someone ought to shear the sheep....

100% - most 'audiophile' wouldn't pass a blind test checking audio quality.

Re: Bluetooth Headphone Jacking: A Key to Your Phone [video]

#220
post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some devices are/were only vulnerable during the initial pairing but a key point from this talk was that most of these devices were vulnerable during normal use. The RACE protocol could be accessed even if the device isn’t in pairing mode. Then once you have a target device’s key you can carry out the attack at anytime, when they’d be unlikely to notice.

If you have the target device key, you can impersonate the device later. But how do you get the device key in the real world? I would need to be in pairing mode for you to get it. Even if you did get it, then you can answer my calls if you are next to me, which in the real world is certainly noticeable.

> I would need to be in pairing mode for you to get it.

No, that doesn't seem to be the case.

> then you can answer my calls if you are next to me, which in the real world is certainly noticeable.

You may not notice if the call was answered automatically and you didn't have your device on you, and the call could be forwarded with acceptable latency so the speech wouldn't be in earshot. Or these days you could use an AI to generate voice and it would sound realistic.

Just because something isn't likely to affect ordinary citizens doesn't mean it isn't possible.

Post reply on HN