321–330 of 359 posts
I im honest I don't see the big deal with this practice. a) You can unlock the device b) You can connect via WiFi, why is the device 'phoning home' such a big deal when its brand new and has no data on it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think I'm insane for not wanting my cellphone to get stolen and then be sold as a working phone to somebody else. Anything to cut down resale value of stolen phones. With full root you can overwrite the IMEI, and the stolen phone is as good as new.
The other way to do that, which I know is crazy in modern times, is to actually enforce property crime laws and punish people that steal things... how novel... instead we have to accept draconian controls on our ownership of devices as a way to combat theft. I would much rather see criminals punished....
It's not that no enforcement happens, a quick search for "phone theft ring busted" returned an article [1] from March of this year. The search results suggest it's far from the only relatively recent bust.
Phones have exceptional monetary value compared to their size/weight. They're easy to steal, and anything that makes wiping the phone easier, faster, or cheaper will be exploited as it increases the value the thieves, fences, etc can extract.
The enforcement scheme needed to substantially reduce phone theft would likely be extremely expensive. It would also likely involve device and purchase tracking methods that many would consider draconic and ripe for abuse by governments and law enforcement.
What would you specifically recommend be done on the enforcement side of things, compared to what happens presently?
[1] https://www.surfsantamonica.com/ssm_site/the_lookout/news/Ne...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The rationale for the hoops and waiting period is IIRC that shady sellers were tampering with phones sold through AliExpress etc.
So imagine a scenario: 1. crime organization (or governmental org) buys / steals a bunch of phones 2. org opens boxes, tampers with boot loader in such a way that they (and / or the original OEM and / or the original OS vendor) have a persistent remote administration account on phone 3. org then returns phones to supply chain either covertly or off the back of a truck. 4. org leverages remote access to do shady thing…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is incorrect. Have you considered that the delay between getting the device and getting it connected could be well outside of the return window or people could be purchasing them in countries without such consumer rights? Smartphones aren’t only for the developed world.
Who buys a brand new phone but also has no internet connection for weeks? Do they have all the apps they need pre-downloaded? I don't think that's a big group.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Never been an issue? Just recently there was a LTT review of an Aliexpress laptop [1] where they found the Windows install had been tampered with (mostly because the Windows was pirated). PC or phone or anything, you buy stuff from shady sources it will not be trustworthy. If Xiaomi is/was locking down their phones to try and make purchasing from places like Aliexpress safer, I think that is a losing battle. [1] http…
I bought a laptop from Dell and found the Windows install had been tampered with; there were all sorts of adware and trial software installed. Luckily, since the boot loader wasn't locked, I could install my own, clean OS.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The other way to do that, which I know is crazy in modern times, is to actually enforce property crime laws and punish people that steal things... how novel... instead we have to accept draconian controls on our ownership of devices as a way to combat theft. I would much rather see criminals punished....
"Defense in depth" applies to crime too. After-the-crime discovery and punishment can only do so much. It's not that no enforcement happens, a quick search for "phone theft ring busted" returned an article [1] from March of this year. The search results suggest it's far from the only relatively recent bust. Phones have exceptional monetary value compared to their size/weight. They're easy to steal, and anything that…
very limited enforcement happens, for every story you pull that shows enforcement, i can pull 10 that shows that even when a person can track their stolen phone to a building with "find my phone" many police dept refuse to do anything. This is a common thing.
I am willing to bet the phone theft ring that was busted was only busted as ancillary to a wider investigation in to terrorism, drugs, sex crime, or some other criminal activity and they were not targeting phone thefts at all
It would also be interesting to know if the charges are dropped, as they often are these days for these low level property crimes.
When you have people leaving their windows down, and trunks open to show there is nothing to steal or people can just brazingly walk in to a store and walk out of handfuls of merchandise because theft is soo rampant and prosecutors refuse to prosecute the crimes there is an enforcement issue.
>>The enforcement scheme needed to substantially reduce phone theft would likely be extremely expensive
I disagree, but please enlighten me as to what you think will be expensive
>>What would you specifically recommend be done on the enforcement side of things, compared to what happens presently?
Actually filling criminal charges for theft instead of just the Catch and release model we have today, so much so that police dept often do not even arrest or investigate the crimes at all because they know activist prosecutors will simply refuse to file charges for any theft under a certain dollar value.
I am not sure why this is even debated given that stores are moving out of several cities due to rampant theft that is going unenforced / unpunished. A quick search will show news report after news report of unlawful property theft being done sometimes even in full view of law enforcement who do nothing because they have been instructed not to in many major cities
> I bought a Pixel 7 Pro from store.google.com (Canada) ... being sold “unlocked” by Google Carrier-locking is not permitted in Canada, so all the discussions about where the phone was bought and that the full price was paid are immaterial.
Is that correct? Phones purchased via carrier are locked to the carrier. The customer has the right to unlock it after the purchase, but the default state of the phone is locked, is it not?
https://www.canada.ca/en/radio-television-telecommunications...
https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/crtc-wireless-code-cellphon...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> is something that might be defensible. I would like to propose that it never is, and only seems so sometimes because our society is insane.
I don't think I'm insane for not wanting my cellphone to get stolen and then be sold as a working phone to somebody else. Anything to cut down resale value of stolen phones. With full root you can overwrite the IMEI, and the stolen phone is as good as new.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Xiaomi does the same (or at least did until my latest phone change i.e. around 3 years ago). You must unlock the bootloader before being able to install a custom recovery image such as TWRP, which itself is used to install custom ROMs. This unlock involves: creating a user account in the Xiaomi services website, logging into that account from your phone's system, then having the phone logged in for at least 7 days ,…
> then having the phone logged in for at least 7 days I unlocked the bootloader with the unlock tool less than 12 hours after purchasing my Xiaomi Mi 8. How come everybody has to wait that long?