7 ms·

Most people don't want or need root access to their smartphone but will complain (no matter how much you tell them security is their responsibility when acting

Most people don't want or need root access to their smartphone but will complain (no matter how much you tell them security is their responsibility when acting as root) when installing random software they found on the internet results in their banking details being stolen followed swiftly by all their money. There are products you can buy in pretty much every category if you need a general purpose computing device, but most people are better off with a locked down device that reduces significantly the amount of harm they can inadvertently expose themselves too. (As an aside, I use an iPhone and can perform - with varying degrees of hassle imposed by iOS' restrictions - many of my day to day "creation" activities, with the bigger annoyance coming from small screen size than the locked down nature of the device. In some cases, in fact, the tools available for mobile OSes are far better than those on the desktop/web due to the incentive created by app store ecosystems.)

woofiefa 11y ago
Most people probably don't need free speech either, but we don't remove the possibility anyway. There are also plenty of examples of mobile devices being infected even though the user didn't have root access.
- barnabee 11y ago
  We don't remove the possibility of open hardware either, there are options for partially or completely open smartphones (as a quick web search will attest) but the most popular products sold by Samsung, Apple, et al. are not. Equally, as for free speech, there are options for completely uncensored speech (although fewer than you think, and even then if you say certain things you'd better hope they can't be traced back to you or have an escape plan) but the most popular ways of communicating (whether online or off) are also locked down to a significant extent. So it's not actually much different for speech vs. access to devices. Feel free to argue for anarchy if that's what you want, but let's not pretend that smartphones represent a special and particularly nefarious restriction of important freedoms.
  - mikegioia 11y ago
    This is ridiculous. Name ONE option for a "completely open smartphone". I've spent the last 4 years in search of just ONE open phone and the closest we've come is the Neo900 (stalled, out of money) the Freerunner (production run of 100?), OsmocomBB running on an ancient candybar (illegal), and this hobby project [1] that is more toy than anything viable. The Nokia n900 was the last "openish" phone to come out and they stopped making those in 2011 when, guess what, they were bought by Microsoft. [1] http://www.seeed.cc/rephone/ http://www.seeed.cc/rephone/
    - nextos 11y ago
      Pyra might be the best chance to get a N900-like device. Not too alike though, as it's not really a smartphone. Sad times.
    - seba_dos1 11y ago
      You probably meant GTA04 phones instead of Openmoko Neo Freerunner - the latter was sold in more than 10 000 devices. Yes, not counting GTA04, N900 was pretty much the last phone out there that you could call "openish". However, I can tell that Neo900 is not quite done yet and even though with time passing by it obviously gets less exciting than when it was announced, I'm still looking forward to it.
      - mikegioia 11y ago
        I hope you're right Sebastian :( I've been following the progress, Joerg, you, and everyone else pretty religiously and there's nothing I'd love more than that phone! I miss the n900.
izacus 11y ago
What does having an ability to gain root access have to do with installing random malware apps? You can easily have a device with disabled root access and a curated store as a default and make gaining root access an added functionality (similarly how Android Nexus phones require you to issue a fastboot oem unlock command). Where does this idea that the only alternative to not having some non-technical people install malware is to forbid root access to EVERYONE else?!
- newday 11y ago
  A large number of malware sites will walk you through side loading and bypassing your security to install their app which may be a compromised game or app like a Trojan. Not having this access is the only way to deal with this.
  - izacus 11y ago
    No it isn't. Just like random scammers leading people to give them money doesn't mean everyone should be banned from having a bank account or a credit card. Some minimal level of responsibility of action from a users side isn't unreasonable. Being locked out from your own hardware because there are a few uneducated users out there is absurd. Not to mention that now there are actually viruses and exploits out there that install themselves through security holes on users devices and the users can't remove them because they're locked out!
    - raesene9 11y ago
      Care to provide some examples of iOS Viruses and exploits that install themselves and are un-removable due to restricted user experience? I have never seen any of those before.
      - jhasse 11y ago
        No problem: http://blog.binamuse.com/2014/09/coregraphics-memory-corruption.html http://blog.binamuse.com/2014/09/coregraphics-memory-corrupt... If you got an older iPhone, it's best not to open random PDFs anymore.
nextos 11y ago
I would believe (partially) in the argument of security, if locking down phones was not used for what, in my view, is a clear case of planned obsolescence. Phones are unique devices in generally requiring you to buy new hardware after 2 or 3 years if you want up-to-date software. This is wasteful and infuriating. My 13 year old PC is still able to run the latest version of Ubuntu, and does a pretty good job at it. I really really wish Nokia had gone the N900/N9 route. Or now that they somehow acquire Jolla. For us, developers, phones are small computers. There's no difference. Locked down devices are simply restricting our ability to do things. We need something different.
- qb45 11y ago
  > Phones are unique devices in generally requiring you to buy new hardware after 2 or 3 years if you want up-to-date software. That's totally software's fault. I find it kinda hilarious that my sister is looking for a new smartphone because her few years old Samsung is laggy while all she does is chatting with friends and watching their pics - things people did on dog slow PCs from the '90s.
  - nextos 11y ago
    I think this is ultimately a consequence of locked down hardware. If manufacturers released drivers for your sister's device, your sister would be able to install a different operating system which would satisfy her needs.
kuschku 11y ago
Good argument, except: On Android, currently, we have 3 completely separate "App with no permissions" to "Full bootloader unlock" exploit chains. (in 5.1) Malicious people always find a way to abuse your system. Restricting freedom for security means you will get neither.
logicrook 11y ago
I always find fantastic how these kinds of arguments can be made blatantly ignoring that they basically are a plea for authoritarian governments. Do you realize how bad basic freedoms are? Most people are better off without them, because many would harm themselves. And can you imagine the gains if instead of letting people speak for themselves, we has a single entity vetting everyone's discourse? Man, dictatorship is so great, so efficient.
- throwawayaway 11y ago
  Vote Trump, get a despot - have Americans live with the consequencies of locked down technology, surveillance.
- icebraining 11y ago
  The difference is that you purposefully opt-in to a smartphone, but can't opt-in (at least, not on an individual basis) to a regime. Would a totalitarian state be as objectionable if people had to chose to move there, and could leave as easily as one can change phones?
  - logicrook 11y ago
    There are consistently laws to purposefully remove digital rights for the people (think encryption tools). With this argument, you justify that rights should be taken from everybody for the sake of the majority, and there's no opt-in anymore.
    - icebraining 11y ago
      I don't understand your point.
  - Laforet 11y ago
    People who are born in such a regime usually don't get a (easy) opt-out but I digress. My feelings towards AAPL was pretty mixed from day 1 and has changed surprisingly little over the past few years. I genuinely applaud their take on many issues such as strong encryption and the ability to side-load your own apps from source. On the other hand I am very alarmed by the fact that backing up apps from iOS device is no longer possible from iOS9. It might be an improvement for security, version control or whatever, but it made me very reluctant to pick up my iPad again knowing that I have less control of the platform than ever before. Keep in mind that iOS devices must phone home for activation and repeat the process every three years. It is rather unlikely yet not entirely impossible that one day Apple will cease to provide activaton for older devices and render them useless. In that sense I don't really own my iPad but paid a premium for the priviledge to able to use it, only as long as Apple allows me to. Suffice to say I refuse to be subject to the same tyranny again.

woofiefa 11y ago

Most people probably don't need free speech either, but we don't remove the possibility anyway. There are also plenty of examples of mobile devices being infected even though the user didn't have root access.

barnabee 11y ago
We don't remove the possibility of open hardware either, there are options for partially or completely open smartphones (as a quick web search will attest) but the most popular products sold by Samsung, Apple, et al. are not. Equally, as for free speech, there are options for completely uncensored speech (although fewer than you think, and even then if you say certain things you'd better hope they can't be traced back to you or have an escape plan) but the most popular ways of communicating (whether online or off) are also locked down to a significant extent. So it's not actually much different for speech vs. access to devices. Feel free to argue for anarchy if that's what you want, but let's not pretend that smartphones represent a special and particularly nefarious restriction of important freedoms.
- mikegioia 11y ago
  This is ridiculous. Name ONE option for a "completely open smartphone". I've spent the last 4 years in search of just ONE open phone and the closest we've come is the Neo900 (stalled, out of money) the Freerunner (production run of 100?), OsmocomBB running on an ancient candybar (illegal), and this hobby project [1] that is more toy than anything viable. The Nokia n900 was the last "openish" phone to come out and they stopped making those in 2011 when, guess what, they were bought by Microsoft. [1] http://www.seeed.cc/rephone/ http://www.seeed.cc/rephone/
  - nextos 11y ago
    Pyra might be the best chance to get a N900-like device. Not too alike though, as it's not really a smartphone. Sad times.
  - seba_dos1 11y ago
    You probably meant GTA04 phones instead of Openmoko Neo Freerunner - the latter was sold in more than 10 000 devices. Yes, not counting GTA04, N900 was pretty much the last phone out there that you could call "openish". However, I can tell that Neo900 is not quite done yet and even though with time passing by it obviously gets less exciting than when it was announced, I'm still looking forward to it.
    - mikegioia 11y ago
      I hope you're right Sebastian :( I've been following the progress, Joerg, you, and everyone else pretty religiously and there's nothing I'd love more than that phone! I miss the n900.

izacus 11y ago

What does having an ability to gain root access have to do with installing random malware apps? You can easily have a device with disabled root access and a curated store as a default and make gaining root access an added functionality (similarly how Android Nexus phones require you to issue a fastboot oem unlock command). Where does this idea that the only alternative to not having some non-technical people install malware is to forbid root access to EVERYONE else?!

newday 11y ago
A large number of malware sites will walk you through side loading and bypassing your security to install their app which may be a compromised game or app like a Trojan. Not having this access is the only way to deal with this.
- izacus 11y ago
  No it isn't. Just like random scammers leading people to give them money doesn't mean everyone should be banned from having a bank account or a credit card. Some minimal level of responsibility of action from a users side isn't unreasonable. Being locked out from your own hardware because there are a few uneducated users out there is absurd. Not to mention that now there are actually viruses and exploits out there that install themselves through security holes on users devices and the users can't remove them because they're locked out!
  - raesene9 11y ago
    Care to provide some examples of iOS Viruses and exploits that install themselves and are un-removable due to restricted user experience? I have never seen any of those before.
    - jhasse 11y ago
      No problem: http://blog.binamuse.com/2014/09/coregraphics-memory-corruption.html http://blog.binamuse.com/2014/09/coregraphics-memory-corrupt... If you got an older iPhone, it's best not to open random PDFs anymore.

nextos 11y ago

I would believe (partially) in the argument of security, if locking down phones was not used for what, in my view, is a clear case of planned obsolescence. Phones are unique devices in generally requiring you to buy new hardware after 2 or 3 years if you want up-to-date software. This is wasteful and infuriating. My 13 year old PC is still able to run the latest version of Ubuntu, and does a pretty good job at it. I really really wish Nokia had gone the N900/N9 route. Or now that they somehow acquire Jolla. For us, developers, phones are small computers. There's no difference. Locked down devices are simply restricting our ability to do things. We need something different.

qb45 11y ago
> Phones are unique devices in generally requiring you to buy new hardware after 2 or 3 years if you want up-to-date software. That's totally software's fault. I find it kinda hilarious that my sister is looking for a new smartphone because her few years old Samsung is laggy while all she does is chatting with friends and watching their pics - things people did on dog slow PCs from the '90s.
- nextos 11y ago
  I think this is ultimately a consequence of locked down hardware. If manufacturers released drivers for your sister's device, your sister would be able to install a different operating system which would satisfy her needs.

kuschku 11y ago

Good argument, except: On Android, currently, we have 3 completely separate "App with no permissions" to "Full bootloader unlock" exploit chains. (in 5.1) Malicious people always find a way to abuse your system. Restricting freedom for security means you will get neither.

logicrook 11y ago

I always find fantastic how these kinds of arguments can be made blatantly ignoring that they basically are a plea for authoritarian governments. Do you realize how bad basic freedoms are? Most people are better off without them, because many would harm themselves. And can you imagine the gains if instead of letting people speak for themselves, we has a single entity vetting everyone's discourse? Man, dictatorship is so great, so efficient.

throwawayaway 11y ago
Vote Trump, get a despot - have Americans live with the consequencies of locked down technology, surveillance.
icebraining 11y ago
The difference is that you purposefully opt-in to a smartphone, but can't opt-in (at least, not on an individual basis) to a regime. Would a totalitarian state be as objectionable if people had to chose to move there, and could leave as easily as one can change phones?
- logicrook 11y ago
  There are consistently laws to purposefully remove digital rights for the people (think encryption tools). With this argument, you justify that rights should be taken from everybody for the sake of the majority, and there's no opt-in anymore.
  - icebraining 11y ago
    I don't understand your point.
- Laforet 11y ago
  People who are born in such a regime usually don't get a (easy) opt-out but I digress. My feelings towards AAPL was pretty mixed from day 1 and has changed surprisingly little over the past few years. I genuinely applaud their take on many issues such as strong encryption and the ability to side-load your own apps from source. On the other hand I am very alarmed by the fact that backing up apps from iOS device is no longer possible from iOS9. It might be an improvement for security, version control or whatever, but it made me very reluctant to pick up my iPad again knowing that I have less control of the platform than ever before. Keep in mind that iOS devices must phone home for activation and repeat the process every three years. It is rather unlikely yet not entirely impossible that one day Apple will cease to provide activaton for older devices and render them useless. In that sense I don't really own my iPad but paid a premium for the priviledge to able to use it, only as long as Apple allows me to. Suffice to say I refuse to be subject to the same tyranny again.