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

Manufacturer 'make worthless' users devices after some stolen from a warehouse

phasenoise.livejournal.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 70 posts

Re: Manufacturer 'make worthless' users devices after some stolen from a warehouse

#31

Post by cr1895 »

dexen wrote: post #24
unit91 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In many states even unknowing possession of stolen goods is a crime I've never heard of this. Source?

Possession of stolen goods [1] is a crime USA-wide, and in many other countries. The rationale behind is ability to prosecute fences [2] - people who act as intermediaries and a layer of security between thieves and end-users, providing the thieves with option for easy cash-out. Edit: As a counter-point, at least in Poland, while obtaining stolen goods is an offense ("paserstwo"[3]), the buyer of any good or service…

From your own link:

"A person can be found guilty of that offense only if all of the following facts are proven: The person received or concealed or stored or disposed of items of stolen property. The items were moving as, or constituted a part of, interstate commerce. The items had a value in excess of $5,000. The person acted knowingly and willfully."

So that doesn't really answer the question asked, because it's only a federal crime if the goods are known to be stolen and a part of "interstate commerce."

Now, at the state level, this may differ. But neither of us has that information.

Re: Manufacturer 'make worthless' users devices after some stolen from a warehouse

#32

Post by Azeolus »

malik9 wrote: post #3

Previously owned devices sales next? If they are including blacklisting code like this their software simply cannot be trusted.

No. There is a simple explanation too. Once a valid sale happens ownership changes. They still own these devices, because they were stolen. That means they can do whatever they please, the devices are still theirs.

Re: Manufacturer 'make worthless' users devices after some stolen from a warehouse

#33

Post by codedokode »

jhall1468 wrote: post #21
smitherfield wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the burden is on the buyer not to purchase stolen goods. The manufacturer is certainly under no obligation to support them. In many states even unknowing possession of stolen goods is a crime, so many of the "users" here are in fact getting off lightly.

> Yeah, the burden is on the buyer not to purchase stolen goods. 1 party has 100% of the information, 1 party has 0% of the information, and the burden is on the party with 0% information. That's absurd. > The manufacturer is certainly under no obligation to support them. Not support and bricking are two different things. > In many states even unknowing possession of stolen goods is a crime Generally the state has to…

> 1 party has 100% of the information, 1 party has 0% of the information, and the burden is on the party with 0% information. That's absurd.

As I know the law requires you to return stolen goods even if you didn't know they were stolen. So this sounds fair.

Re: Manufacturer 'make worthless' users devices after some stolen from a warehouse

#34

Post by dexen »

cr1895 wrote: post #31
dexen wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Possession of stolen goods [1] is a crime USA-wide, and in many other countries. The rationale behind is ability to prosecute fences [2] - people who act as intermediaries and a layer of security between thieves and end-users, providing the thieves with option for easy cash-out. Edit: As a counter-point, at least in Poland, while obtaining stolen goods is an offense ("paserstwo"[3]), the buyer of any good or service…

From your own link: "A person can be found guilty of that offense only if all of the following facts are proven: The person received or concealed or stored or disposed of items of stolen property. The items were moving as, or constituted a part of, interstate commerce. The items had a value in excess of $5,000. The person acted knowingly and willfully." So that doesn't really answer the question asked, because it's o…

A subsequent section on Wikipedia (link [1] in GP) tells us the following:

>All US states also have laws regarding receipt of stolen property; however, there usually is no minimum dollar amount in many jurisdictions, and, of course, the requirement in Federal law regarding interstate commerce does not apply.

i.e., USA-wide

>Also, in many states (Ohio, for example), the burden to prove criminal intent is not as stringent or is nonexistent.

i hereby rest my case.

Re: Manufacturer 'make worthless' users devices after some stolen from a warehouse

#35

Post by Jonnax »

codedokode wrote: post #29

Those who bought stolen devices should return them and ask for a refund from EBay. You are generally not allowed to resell stolen goods, although I am not sure if EBay is liable here. > Back in October 2014, the FDTI manufacturer shipped a device driver that ... would make any operating system stop seeing the device by setting its USB product ID to 0 , basically killing the USB device. Well, if that id can be set to…

If I recall correctly, it didn't get recognised as a USB device anymore so you couldn't reflash it.

Re: Manufacturer 'make worthless' users devices after some stolen from a warehouse

#36

Post by discreditable »

chatmasta wrote: post #30

Wouldn’t it be pretty trivial to remove the blacklisting code? It’s not like this is a cellphone sold to my mom. It’s an extremely specialist product aimed at a group of users with vast electronics and reverse engineering knowledge. Probably won’t be long before one of them reverse engineers the device and releases the code to ignore the blacklisting. Anyone know the technical details of how the blacklisting works?

If you unintentionally buy a blacklisted phone online, do you try to break the blacklist or report the seller and get a refund?

Re: Manufacturer 'make worthless' users devices after some stolen from a warehouse

#37

Post by [deleted] »

discreditable wrote: post #36
chatmasta wrote: post #30

Wouldn’t it be pretty trivial to remove the blacklisting code? It’s not like this is a cellphone sold to my mom. It’s an extremely specialist product aimed at a group of users with vast electronics and reverse engineering knowledge. Probably won’t be long before one of them reverse engineers the device and releases the code to ignore the blacklisting. Anyone know the technical details of how the blacklisting works?

If you unintentionally buy a blacklisted phone online, do you try to break the blacklist or report the seller and get a refund?

[deleted]

Re: Manufacturer 'make worthless' users devices after some stolen from a warehouse

#38

Post by [deleted] »

cr1895 wrote: post #31
dexen wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Possession of stolen goods [1] is a crime USA-wide, and in many other countries. The rationale behind is ability to prosecute fences [2] - people who act as intermediaries and a layer of security between thieves and end-users, providing the thieves with option for easy cash-out. Edit: As a counter-point, at least in Poland, while obtaining stolen goods is an offense ("paserstwo"[3]), the buyer of any good or service…

From your own link: "A person can be found guilty of that offense only if all of the following facts are proven: The person received or concealed or stored or disposed of items of stolen property. The items were moving as, or constituted a part of, interstate commerce. The items had a value in excess of $5,000. The person acted knowingly and willfully." So that doesn't really answer the question asked, because it's o…

[deleted]

Re: Manufacturer 'make worthless' users devices after some stolen from a warehouse

#39

Post by jandrese »

unit91 wrote: post #17
smitherfield wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the burden is on the buyer not to purchase stolen goods. The manufacturer is certainly under no obligation to support them. In many states even unknowing possession of stolen goods is a crime, so many of the "users" here are in fact getting off lightly.

> In many states even unknowing possession of stolen goods is a crime I've never heard of this. Source?

If you surrender the goods and have a plausible reason for not knowing that they were stolen then you won't be prosecuted. You will be SoL on getting your money back unless you bought from the worlds most scrupulous fence though.

It's a risk when you buy anything from eBay or the like, but the overall risk is small enough that the savings are justified usually.

Re: Manufacturer 'make worthless' users devices after some stolen from a warehouse

#40

Post by tinus_hn »

fencepost wrote: post #26

I can't bring myself to be bothered by this - and wouldn't be even if I were using these devices. For crying out loud, equipment with unique recorded serial numbers was stolen, so the company is blocking the specific stolen devices. That makes perfect sense to me. Objecting to how they do it (bulking up software with a list of serials, requiring software to phone home, whatever) is fine and their customers have a leg…

In other news, try using a stolen iPhone (since the last 6 years). I came across this article:

https://www.cultofmac.com/246755/why-ios-7s-activation-lock-...

Which in typical Apple whining style complains how the sky will fall due to this new feature. And then it didn’t.

Post reply on HN