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

Hacking my “smart” toothbrush

kuenzi.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 311 posts

Re: Hacking my “smart” toothbrush

#261

Post by error503 »

JadeNB wrote: post #258
conradev wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the mechanical timer ever broke the repairperson would have replacements in their van > That digital timer has no advantage to the user over a mechanical timer. But it has disadvantages. The mechanical timer is known to degrade over time, which is why the repair person has spares in their van. Does the digital timer really have no advantages? Will it ever fail and need to be replaced? How much more does it cost?…

> The mechanical timer is known to degrade over time, which is why the repair person has spares in their van. Does the digital timer really have no advantages? Will it ever fail and need to be replaced? How much more does it cost? Surely the expected lifetime of a digital timer is shorter than that of a mechanical timer.

Surely is a very strong statement here. I see no reason that a properly designed electronic timer wouldn't have effectively infinite lifetime, which is not possible with a practical mechanical timer. It has no moving parts (other than switches, which can be substituted for capacitive touch). A mechanical timer has many small mechanical parts and wear points, and can get gummed up over time if it doesn't outright stop functioning.

In practice, cost engineering is going to mean neither is completely reliable, but it should be cheaper to make an electronic timer reliable enough. Especially today, where the cost of a functioning mechanical timer is probably an order of magnitude more than an equivalent electronic timer.

Re: Hacking my “smart” toothbrush

#262

Post by adolph »

joelfried wrote: post #256
Kirby64 wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mechanical timers are fine, but digital circuitry is by far going to be more reliable if designed properly. There isn't anything physically moving, so the failure modes are much more restrictive. Also, digital provides advantages with offering variable timing on a dryer, for instance, based on the input of a moisture sensor. Mechanical methods for that are more complicated. Additionally, I would be very surprised if…

There is something physically moving: the machine itself. You can't wash or dry clothing without moving it around. Given that the entire machine moves (and on spin cycles, reasonably quickly), you need to make sure your circuitry is capable of handling the strain. As a homeowner, I wish someone (anyone!) still sold reliable analog appliances that just did their job simply and made repair parts and schematics reasonab…

I do minor appliance repairs on occasion and the current time of manuals, videos and parts availablity feels like a golden age.

Granted, none of my large appliances are younger than 10 years, but I think I could build new ones (expensively) for the all the parts and schematics available, even wiring diagrams.

Re: Hacking my “smart” toothbrush

#263

Post by amlozano »

TheCaptain4815 wrote: post #55

I’ll never forget when my damn sonicare toothbrush app warned me about my iPhone being jailbroken. Had to have been a troll by the creators of the app since not even some of my banking apps had that warning.

As a security professional, I often get asked whether adding a root check is advisable. My general recommendation is to go ahead and implement it, but with a focus on data collection rather than taking action. For instance, you can log if a user is using a jailbroken or rooted device, without interfering with their experience. The responsibility for running a secure operating system lies with the users themselves, not the application. Applications that attempt to restrict how users utilize the app can be likened to malware.

Now, there might be instances where a business executive argues in favor of DRM or ensuring that certain coupons are limited to specific regions. In such cases, its sometimes suggested as a requirement to verify if the app is running in a simulated environment or is rooted. However, I can assure you that if you lock some kind of value behind this check and then rely solely on the operating system to provide this level of security, there will eventually be clever hackers who find ways to bypass the protection. The same principle applies to business-to-business apps that demand extensive control. In such situations, you need to rely on other software solutions or provide dedicated hardware. It's important to refrain from attempting to take ownership of my device, considering it's already under the control of Apple or Google anyway... /sarc. If you require stronger guarantees, I suggest reaching out to them.

Re: Hacking my “smart” toothbrush

#264

Post by arrowsmith »

humanistbot wrote: post #211
arrowsmith wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How long's it going to be before "smart" toothbrushes become the only option? Should I start stockpiling "dumb" toothbrushes now while I still can? The other day I was trying to buy a pair of bathroom scales and it took me far too long to find one that just, you know, weighed things without also demanding I connect it to the Wi-Fi and download a smartphone app. How is this an improvement?

It isn't that hard at all. I'm calling BS, because it seems like you're exaggerating to make a point that would be big, if true. Except it isn't true. First, I've owned several wireless connected bathroom scales from high-end to low-end brands. All of them work out of the box without needing or demanding you connect it to Wi-Fi and download an app. Put in batteries, step on scale, and weight is displayed. If you want…

Christ, I make an offhand comment about a trivially minor frustration I had a few months ago and I come back to find that I've summoned the Spanish Inquisition.

I never claimed that it's impossible to buy a non-connected set of bathroom scales; all I said was that it took me "far too long" - by which I mean I wasted maybe five to ten minutes deciding which bathroom scales to buy because the first few ones I looked at turned out to be overengineered piles of Wifi/smartphone-ready bullshit that I didn't want. Looking on Amazon UK now, I see several "non-connected" scales in the search results, so I'm not sure why I found it so difficult last time, but my memories are what they are.

This is, of course, as trivial of a first-world problem as they possibly come, but it felt vaguely relevant to the current discussion, and it's part of a general trend in consumer electronics that I constantly see people on HN complaining about. Sorry you found it so offensive.

Re: Hacking my “smart” toothbrush

#265

Post by secabeen »

userbinator wrote: post #175
HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of bathroom scales are too "smart" and display recent cached weights rather than real measurements each time, in order to appear more consistent. Accuracy on some is also very bad if you store scales vertically (e.g. propped against wall) as that requires step-on, step-off re-calibration which people forget to do. I'm not sure you can even buy "just works" dumb mechanical scales any more.

I'm not sure you can even buy "just works" dumb mechanical scales any more. You can, they're just more expensive (relatively speaking) because they cost more to make.

Not my much, even; the analog scale on amazon is $27, compared to $20-30 for most digital scales.

Re: Hacking my “smart” toothbrush

#266

Post by Kirby64 »

joelfried wrote: post #256
Kirby64 wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mechanical timers are fine, but digital circuitry is by far going to be more reliable if designed properly. There isn't anything physically moving, so the failure modes are much more restrictive. Also, digital provides advantages with offering variable timing on a dryer, for instance, based on the input of a moisture sensor. Mechanical methods for that are more complicated. Additionally, I would be very surprised if…

There is something physically moving: the machine itself. You can't wash or dry clothing without moving it around. Given that the entire machine moves (and on spin cycles, reasonably quickly), you need to make sure your circuitry is capable of handling the strain. As a homeowner, I wish someone (anyone!) still sold reliable analog appliances that just did their job simply and made repair parts and schematics reasonab…

Nobody would attach the timer to the actual moving drum, so the worst it has to deal with is physical vibrations from use (which, admittedly, can be quite violent if you have an unbalanced load). There are very few digital circuits that are actually meaningfully sensitive to vibrations. At worst, it's a manufacturing problem to make sure the PCB/solder joints don't crack from vibration.

In comparison, the mechanical timer is physically moving. A clockspring, or some sort of mechanism that physically sets the time remaining. Depending on how it's built, vibrations are a harder problem to solve. Not impossible, obviously, but it certainly adds cost.

Also, for most appliances we deal with today... they usually ARE simple to work on. Simple switches and mechanical contrivances. Parts are typically readily available... even PCBs, although possibly not at great pricing. There's certain appliances where you are basically screwed (fridges come to mind...), but that is mainly in my view because the typical failing part is the compressor. Nobody is rebuilding a compressor themselves.

Re: Hacking my “smart” toothbrush

#267

Post by mkskm »

zerd wrote: post #260
mkskm wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They make third-party compostable bamboo brush heads for Philips now, e.g. https://thesustainabletomorrow.com/products/bamboo-heads-phi...

This is probably why they're doing all the electronic shenanigans, so they can later verify that you're using a Genuine Authentic® brush head.

Yeah, then on top of plastic pollution we can have more e-waste.

Re: Hacking my “smart” toothbrush

#268

Post by ubermonkey »

fsflover wrote: post #222
JohnFen wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. For a toothbrush, the chips are a problem. If nothing else, manufacturing chips is very bad for the environment. We shouldn't be putting them in things that don't need them.

If we were talking about the climate problem, you would be right. But your comment is a goal shifting, because I replied to the problem of abuse of the firmware in the chips. Abuse can't happen with free software.

LOL

Re: Hacking my “smart” toothbrush

#269

Post by NwtnsMthd »

bagels wrote: post #202
GoToRO wrote: post #128

Some facts: The tag is used to change the cleaning mode of the toothbrush automatically, to match the type of head you inserted. This makes very easy to change heads durring the same session. It is also used to register how long you used that head. A warning is shown when the head should be replaced. After a few warnings you will no longer get them, just the led to replace the head remains on. You can continue to bru…

Is it less effective because they slow the motors down or other trickery?

No, it doesn't appear so. It seems the bristles do wear out somehow, to me it appears that they simply become less stiff over time. The change to a new brush head is noticeable.

This should be relatively easy to verify. One could take a new brush head and forward its counter to the limit, directly comparing it to a new unmodified brush.

Re: Hacking my “smart” toothbrush

#270

Post by JadeNB »

error503 wrote: post #261
JadeNB wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The mechanical timer is known to degrade over time, which is why the repair person has spares in their van. Does the digital timer really have no advantages? Will it ever fail and need to be replaced? How much more does it cost? Surely the expected lifetime of a digital timer is shorter than that of a mechanical timer.

Surely is a very strong statement here. I see no reason that a properly designed electronic timer wouldn't have effectively infinite lifetime, which is not possible with a practical mechanical timer. It has no moving parts (other than switches, which can be substituted for capacitive touch). A mechanical timer has many small mechanical parts and wear points, and can get gummed up over time if it doesn't outright stop…

I'm willing to believe that the best electronic switches can last longer than the best mechanical switches, but there's so many more ways for an electronic switch to fail that it's a lot easier for me to trust an off-the-shelf mechanical switch than an off-the-shelf electronic one, especially if the cost of failure of the mechanical switch is just an easy swap in of another one.
Post reply on HN