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

We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own

hugotunius.se

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 1001 posts

Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own

#301

Post by keepamovin »

The context of "ownership" is more nuanced when it comes to hardware devices - and even software.

What do you think when you say ownership?

I think - "this is totally mine. Nobody else's. I can do with this what I want. It is entirely up to me."

Do you own your passport? In fact, you probably do not. Most passports have a page stating to the effect that "this passport remains the property of ".

DO you own your device? I feel like I own my devices. I will defend them from theft, or loss. Because they are "mine". But ownership in a broader or legal context implies more rights that I don't think I have. I don't own the IP to the hardware and software on the device. These components have licenses to which I agree and am bound simply because I possess and use the device. These contracts restrict the things I am allowed to do. So my "ownership" also comes with certain "responsibilities" - which I personally don't believe I ever think about. But they exist.

For instance, probably somewhere in these contracts something is said to the effect that I cannot reverse engineer, reproduce and resell components or plans for these components. And myriad other things. Designed to protect the business and investment and people who invented and built them.

"Ownership" in the age of complex "finished products" that result from trillions dollar global supply changes of incomprehensible complexity is more nuanced than the idea that I found a log in the forest, and now the log is mine.

Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own

#302

Post by necovek »

nuker wrote: post #269
josephg wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My parents are getting old and they aren't tech savvy. The missing piece here is that I want my parents to have a computer they can safely do their banking on, without leaving them vulnerable to scams and viruses and the like. I like that they have iphones. Doing internet banking on their phone is safer than doing it on their desktop computer. Why is that? The reason is that the desktop PC security model is deeply fl…

> My parents are getting old and they aren't tech savvy. The missing piece here is that I want my parents to have a computer they can safely do their banking on, without leaving them vulnerable to scams and viruses and the like. Purists always forget this point :) What is best for 99% of people. And dumb Euro bureaucrats.

That's what can be achieved by encapsulation/containerization of apps: a la flatpak, snaps, docker or VMs...

I found my parents to install random crappy adware apps from official stores too. What protects their banking application is granular permissions, not root access.

Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own

#303

Post by altairprime »

zmmmmm wrote: post #165

> In this context this would mean having the ability and documentation to build or install alternative operating systems on this hardware It doesn't work. Everything from banks to Netflix and others are slowly edging out anything where they can't fully verify the chain of control to an entity they can have a legal or contractual relationship with. To be clear, this is fundamental, not incidental. You can't run your o…

There’s a scenario where this does work: you can install any operating system on the hardware you own, if you complete a “erase all content and settings” dire scary confirmation screen.

- If you want to run something other than iPadOS or Google TV, go for it. (Smart TVs are just tablets with a don’t-touch screen.)

- If you want to install spyware on someone’s phone, you can’t; the HSM keys held by their OS are lost when you try to install a patched version and restore from a backup, and their backup doesn’t restore properly because half of it depends on the HSM or the cloud and everything is tagged with the old OS’s signature.

- If you want to patch macOS and then deploy it to your fleet, you can; it won’t be Signed By Apple but you’re an enterprise and don’t care about the small losses of functionality from that.

- If you want to dual boot, go ahead; the issues with the HSMs not permitting you to host two OSes worth of partitioned keystones can be resolved by regulatory pressure.

This satisfies all the terms of “let me install whatever I want”, while allowing the OG App Store to continue operating in Safe Mode for everyday users in a way that can’t be entrapped without the scammer on the phone telling them to delete everything, which destroys the data the scammer wants.

My car already allows me to do this. My phone should too.

Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own

#304

Post by necovek »

nuker wrote: post #281
quaintdev wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not give people the freedom to choose what they want

It will be exploited. Key word above - not tech savvy. The only reason we have convenient banking, gov and streaming apps today is because of guaranteed and enforced mobile security by big boys Apple and Google. (Google being Ad company is another matter, not relevant here).

They all existed before mobile apps on systems you don't control became prevalent.

This was just useful for them.

Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own

#305

Post by DataDynamo »

ozgrakkurt wrote: post #278
josephg wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My parents are getting old and they aren't tech savvy. The missing piece here is that I want my parents to have a computer they can safely do their banking on, without leaving them vulnerable to scams and viruses and the like. I like that they have iphones. Doing internet banking on their phone is safer than doing it on their desktop computer. Why is that? The reason is that the desktop PC security model is deeply fl…

What are the stats here, this sounds like pure bs to be honest. Main way people around me get scammed by far like 90% is social engineering

It will need just one more additional authentication factor and blocking side loading apps on Android - We promise, total security is close! /s

Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own

#306

Post by onion2k »

tonyhart7 wrote: post #293
ekianjo wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For Netflix sure. I don't care. But when it comes to banking and you are forced to use between two OS or this means no access to your bank digitally, this is a massive problem and restriction to citizens' freedom. Everyone needs a bank to operate, and they need to maximize the options available to use them.

well no one to force you to do banking from smartphones You can do manually like the old days, EXPLICTLY ALLOWING NON GOOGLE/APPLE to do banking in their own mobile phone meaning THERE ARE MILLIONS OF USERS that can fall victim to scammer+cracker how cant you see all of that???? ITS JUST NOT ABOUT YOU edit: please educate first, y'all need to know differences between mobile banking and internet banking You can downvo…

Locking down a website to only be available to users on Apple and Windows doesn't make it safer. It just reduces the cost of building it because you don't have to bother testing it on any other platforms. Rather than tell users "Danger, we haven't tested your choice of OS" companies prefer to lock it down.

Users on Apple and Windows are not safer because a bank has chosen to block Linux.

Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own

#307

Post by fluoridation »

vbezhenar wrote: post #275
idle_zealot wrote: post #4

This makes the point that the real battle we should be fighting is not for control of Android/iOS, but the ability to run other operating systems on phones. That would be great, but as the author acknowledges, building those alternatives is basically impossible. Even assuming that building a solid alternative is feasible, though, I don't think their point stands. Generally I'm not keen on legislatively forcing a deve…

> ability to run other operating systems on phones > building those alternatives is basically impossible For smart people it is not impossible. Just few years ago, few folks wrote complicated drivers for completely closed hardware, and I'm talking about M1 Macbook. Google Pixel, on the other hand, was pretty open until very recently. I might be wrong about specifics, but I'm pretty sure that most of software was open…

>I don't understand why mobile systems do not attract OS builders.

My guess would be that it's a continuously moving target. There's no point in spending years working to support some weird integrated wifi adapter+battery controller when by the time you're done the hardware is already obsolete and no longer being manufactured. Repeat that for every device on the phone. The only ones who can keep up with that pace are the manufacturers themselves. It'd be different if there was some kind of standardization that would make the effort worthwhile, though.

Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own

#308

Post by [deleted] »

throwaway31131 wrote: post #192
makeitdouble wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google and Apple have more power than most nations. To push further, Google and Apple have basically as much power as the US. The UK going after Apple, only to get rebutted by the US is the most simple instance of it. International treaties pushed by the US strongly protecting it's top corporations is the more standard behavior. Any entity fighting the duopoly is effectively getting into a fight with the US.

> To push further, Google and Apple have basically as much power as the US. If this is true then why is Tim Cook visiting Trump? Shouldn’t it be the other way around.

[deleted]

Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own

#309

Post by 2rsf »

ekianjo wrote: post #243
fastaguy88 wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really not a libertarian, but why shouldn’t Netflix have the right to choose who they distribute content to? They negotiated conditions with the creators, why shouldn’t they be able to specify the DRM? No one is forcing you to subscribe to Netflix. Or even to buy an iPad.

For Netflix sure. I don't care. But when it comes to banking and you are forced to use between two OS or this means no access to your bank digitally, this is a massive problem and restriction to citizens' freedom. Everyone needs a bank to operate, and they need to maximize the options available to use them.

I mentioned that in another thread, but banks have a legal obligation to to assess and mitigate risks in the service they give to you- you, personally, might be tech savvy enough to understand what you are doing but most people are not and the bank is held accountable when something bad happens.

This is why they limit service to certain devices or OS versions, even when it comes at the expense of convenience.

Re: We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own

#310

Post by fastball »

tavavex wrote: post #202
fastball wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple is a company, not a government. I haven't traded my liberty for anything. Again, you can buy a different phone – that is where liberty comes into this equation. If the USG decides to pass a law saying you can only buy iPhones, then we will have more to talk about w.r.t. liberty. Nothing actually prevents you from modifying your iPhone however you see fit, btw. If you are incapable of breaking Apple's security w…

> If the USG decides to pass a law saying you can only buy iPhones, then we will have more to talk about w.r.t. liberty. Is what the US government does the only concern to you? This feels like a very semantic argument that tries to define the government as the sole arbiter of what's expected in our society. Majority consensus has an equal if not greater reach in telling us what we can and can't do. Case in point: the…

You're being a conspiracy theorist. You can in fact replace the battery with a non-Apple battery without issue. The things that break when you replace them without a properly signed version are in fact related to the security of the device. It's not a "guise". I don't want someone with physical access to my phone to be able to access anything on the phone. If I can do this, so can anyone else.
Post reply on HN