3 ms·

I disagree. I also mind when things like my tractor or my car are locked down to prevent my ability to use a 3rd party repair shop, repair it myself, or make c

I disagree. I also mind when things like my tractor or my car are locked down to prevent my ability to use a 3rd party repair shop, repair it myself, or make changes so the item better suits me: The person who fucking owns that computer. I think there's a very real risk that the concept of "ownership" is going to die if we continue in this fashion. Do you own a thing if you're prohibited, intentionally - by the manufacturer - from making any changes? I'd say no. Do you own a thing if it has to check in to an online service controlled by someone else before it works? I'd say no. Instead you're just renting, and these companies are intentionally rent-seeking (in the worst possible way).

Grimm1 6y ago
Add that on to the fact that almost everything is rent to buy with "incentives" shoved in your face for never actually finishing out the contract to own something, like your phone. I think ownership for everyone outside of some select few is in very real danger and I've thought so for some time.
adreamingsoul 6y ago
I agree.
kube-system 6y ago
I still like my car to have an immobilizer, and locks on the ignition and doors. There is certainly some level of access controls that most people definitely want.
- kelnos 6y ago
  That's not what people are taking about, though. Certainly people want security features that make it more difficult for someone else to steal their car. But those features should be under the control of the owner of the car, not the manufacturer.
  - kube-system 6y ago
    It's really hard to do that and make the thing a consumer-friendly product. We've been trying to solve this problem for most of the history of computers, yet, attacking authentication (often indirectly) is still the #1 way that computers are compromised. Most people simply are unable to properly handle private keys. All of the systems with the highest levels of consumer satisfaction have third parties that manage (or at least can override) keys on the user's behalf. Systems that do what you're suggesting are notoriously plagued with issues surrounding key management to the point where they never reach mainstream use. i.e. PGP, bitcoin, etc.
- dTal 6y ago
  And who owns the keys to those things? You, or the manufacturer?
  - kube-system 6y ago
    Many vehicles have the keys stored in their ECU/Immobilizer signed/encrypted with the manufacturers' key. There are some (mostly older) where you can directly reprogram the eeprom but those cars are easier to steal, because anyone can also do this.
- salawat 6y ago
  Those are still "yours" in a sense, so don't fall into the feature set the poster you are replying to is talking about. Though the immobilizer somewhat skirts the line. (Or at least from my personal view). Think John Deere implementing software lockouts in the tractor ECU. That is nothing more than forcing their business model onto the end user through digital logic.
  - kube-system 6y ago
    They're just as much "mine" as an iPhone is. It is extremely common for digital authentication of physical keys to be protected by encryption or signing by the manufacturer.
    - horsawlarway 6y ago
      Sure, but to be as blunt as possible - You don't own your iPhone. Full stop. You are renting it from Apple. They control what you run, when you run it, what you can install, what you can remove. By default, they're shipping you a device where you're literally not the root user. I can't possibly think of a clearer argument that you're renting, and entirely at the whim of Apple (which does have root access, and actually owns the device you happen to be using). The issue to me is that ownership implies the right to modify and change a thing, especially in ways that the original manufacturer doesn't support or agree with. If the manufacturer is still calling all the shots on your device, you don't own the device!
      - kube-system 6y ago
        Sure. No matter what your definition of "own" is -- I am saying, my car is already the same thing. The question is, do we have a good solution to enable the average user to own their device while also ensuring security and availability? We have two options with cars, either intentionally implement a security hole, or let the manufacturer "own" it. Because the other option -- tell the customer they're SOL when they lose their private key, is not a solution that is practical (grandma will lose hers) or possibly even legal (manufacturers' obligation under lemon law).
stjohnswarts 6y ago
I think as long as you're willing to give up your warranty on your tractor/car/whatever because you're hacking on it with 3rd party tools/firmware you should be able to do whatever you want with it. Just remember it's a two way street and everything has a price, you will have to give up something to get something.

Grimm1 6y ago

Add that on to the fact that almost everything is rent to buy with "incentives" shoved in your face for never actually finishing out the contract to own something, like your phone. I think ownership for everyone outside of some select few is in very real danger and I've thought so for some time.

adreamingsoul 6y ago

I agree.

kube-system 6y ago

I still like my car to have an immobilizer, and locks on the ignition and doors. There is certainly some level of access controls that most people definitely want.

kelnos 6y ago
That's not what people are taking about, though. Certainly people want security features that make it more difficult for someone else to steal their car. But those features should be under the control of the owner of the car, not the manufacturer.
- kube-system 6y ago
  It's really hard to do that and make the thing a consumer-friendly product. We've been trying to solve this problem for most of the history of computers, yet, attacking authentication (often indirectly) is still the #1 way that computers are compromised. Most people simply are unable to properly handle private keys. All of the systems with the highest levels of consumer satisfaction have third parties that manage (or at least can override) keys on the user's behalf. Systems that do what you're suggesting are notoriously plagued with issues surrounding key management to the point where they never reach mainstream use. i.e. PGP, bitcoin, etc.
dTal 6y ago
And who owns the keys to those things? You, or the manufacturer?
- kube-system 6y ago
  Many vehicles have the keys stored in their ECU/Immobilizer signed/encrypted with the manufacturers' key. There are some (mostly older) where you can directly reprogram the eeprom but those cars are easier to steal, because anyone can also do this.
salawat 6y ago
Those are still "yours" in a sense, so don't fall into the feature set the poster you are replying to is talking about. Though the immobilizer somewhat skirts the line. (Or at least from my personal view). Think John Deere implementing software lockouts in the tractor ECU. That is nothing more than forcing their business model onto the end user through digital logic.
- kube-system 6y ago
  They're just as much "mine" as an iPhone is. It is extremely common for digital authentication of physical keys to be protected by encryption or signing by the manufacturer.
  - horsawlarway 6y ago
    Sure, but to be as blunt as possible - You don't own your iPhone. Full stop. You are renting it from Apple. They control what you run, when you run it, what you can install, what you can remove. By default, they're shipping you a device where you're literally not the root user. I can't possibly think of a clearer argument that you're renting, and entirely at the whim of Apple (which does have root access, and actually owns the device you happen to be using). The issue to me is that ownership implies the right to modify and change a thing, especially in ways that the original manufacturer doesn't support or agree with. If the manufacturer is still calling all the shots on your device, you don't own the device!
    - kube-system 6y ago
      Sure. No matter what your definition of "own" is -- I am saying, my car is already the same thing. The question is, do we have a good solution to enable the average user to own their device while also ensuring security and availability? We have two options with cars, either intentionally implement a security hole, or let the manufacturer "own" it. Because the other option -- tell the customer they're SOL when they lose their private key, is not a solution that is practical (grandma will lose hers) or possibly even legal (manufacturers' obligation under lemon law).

stjohnswarts 6y ago

I think as long as you're willing to give up your warranty on your tractor/car/whatever because you're hacking on it with 3rd party tools/firmware you should be able to do whatever you want with it. Just remember it's a two way street and everything has a price, you will have to give up something to get something.