4 ms·

Why is this kind of thing legal? For starters, my experience says that, unlike an HP printer, your toothbrush still works just fine[0] if you ignore anything t

Why is this kind of thing legal? For starters, my experience says that, unlike an HP printer, your toothbrush still works just fine[0] if you ignore anything that tells you to replace the head. [0] At least as fine as a toothbrush with a worn-out head is going to work.

josephcsible 3y ago
I don't really mean about the toothbrush. I mean, why is it legal for NXP to make chips that permanently brick instead of just factory resetting when too many wrong passwords are tried?
- JohnFen 3y ago
  Why should it not be legal to make such chips?
  - josephcsible 3y ago
    Because they take control away from the actual owners of devices, and they, unnecessarily contribute to e-waste, for no increase in real security.
    - JohnFen 3y ago
      > they take control away from the actual owners of devices Only if they're used that way. They don't take control away from the actual owners of the devices if its the owners who put them in there, for instance. Again, I think you're conflating the existence of a mechanism with the abuse of the mechanism. If you were just railing against the abusive uses, I'd be behind you 100%. I just don't see why we should outlaw a common and useful mechanism entirely, rather than outlaw certain uses of that mechanism.
- mikestew 3y ago
  Because it's a feature customers ask for? What laws do you want written? How "secure" am I allowed to make my product before the Feds come a-knockin'? And what does a "factory reset" accomplish? The hacker trying to get company IP (or whatever the password is protecting) gets three more attempts at it after the reset? Finally, and I'm not saying this makes it okay, but e-fuses are common as dirt these days. I don't know that you're going to get that toothpaste back in the tube.
  - josephcsible 3y ago
    > Because it's a feature customers ask for? Aren't switches to temporarily bypass emissions controls in cars illegal, despite being a feature customers ask for? > What laws do you want written? I want all e-fuses to be banned, as well as any other means for manufacturers to permanently reduce, restrict, or remove functionality from products after they've been sold. > How "secure" am I allowed to make my product before the Feds come a-knockin'? If the one you're trying to make it "secure" against is the product's owner, then I'd say "not at all" would be a fine answer. > And what does a "factory reset" accomplish? The hacker trying to get company IP (or whatever the password is protecting) gets three more attempts at it after the reset? The point is that the factory reset would delete the company IP. > Finally, and I'm not saying this makes it okay, but e-fuses are common as dirt these days. I don't know that you're going to get that toothpaste back in the tube. Wasn't asbestos also as common as dirt before it was banned?
    - JohnFen 3y ago
      > I want all e-fuses to be banned, as well as any other means for manufacturers to permanently reduce, restrict, or remove functionality from products after they've been sold. I am in opposition to this stance. What you're (rightfully) concerned about is when companies do bad things with these mechanisms. But the mechanisms themselves not only have no ethical/moral problems, but are also really useful for all sorts of things that entirely unobjectionable.
      - josephcsible 3y ago
        What legitimate uses are there for e-fuses that can't be done just as well with arbitrarily rewritable storage?
        JohnFen 3y ago
        Many security applications, situations where you're providing equipment to others and want to make sure it's not modified, etc. It's not that hard to come up with legitimate uses for this. In any case, that sortof doesn't matter. Even if there was no legitimate use for them, that doesn't in and of itself mean they should be illegal. You should at the least demonstrate that their existence is causing great societal harm.
- Zak 3y ago
  I'm inclined to take the common HN position of "trying to lock people out of modifying their own stuff is bad", however there are plenty of situations in which someone who is not the owner might access an NFC tag and try to make it do things the owner does not want it to. Bricking it seems like the nuclear option, but it's not inherently evil to offer the option of NFC tags that are both tamper-resistant and tamper-evident.
  - userbinator 3y ago
    "tamper-evident" would be easily accomplished by completely wiping the contents.
- joezydeco 3y ago
  Because NXP makes this chip compliant with ISO/IEC14443, meaning it can be used in payment cards. EMV requires shit like this in their credit card NFC and I'm thankful for it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO/IEC_14443 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO/IEC_14443
tonyarkles 3y ago
I'm curious but will totally forget to report back in a few months when mine wears out. I'm... not sure, but somewhat confident that it starts to limit the more aggressive brushing modes once its "worn out", although it's possible it was just gummed up internally with toothpaste residue. Last time I changed the head on mine (Philips Sonicare), it definitely felt significantly more powerful with the replacement head.
- goldcd 3y ago
  I think it's just that the bristles are all nicely aligned on a new head - after a while they start splaying, so pressure is going in more directions over a larger area. I do love the feeling of a fresh sonicare brush.

josephcsible 3y ago

I don't really mean about the toothbrush. I mean, why is it legal for NXP to make chips that permanently brick instead of just factory resetting when too many wrong passwords are tried?

JohnFen 3y ago
Why should it not be legal to make such chips?
- josephcsible 3y ago
  Because they take control away from the actual owners of devices, and they, unnecessarily contribute to e-waste, for no increase in real security.
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    > they take control away from the actual owners of devices Only if they're used that way. They don't take control away from the actual owners of the devices if its the owners who put them in there, for instance. Again, I think you're conflating the existence of a mechanism with the abuse of the mechanism. If you were just railing against the abusive uses, I'd be behind you 100%. I just don't see why we should outlaw a common and useful mechanism entirely, rather than outlaw certain uses of that mechanism.
mikestew 3y ago
Because it's a feature customers ask for? What laws do you want written? How "secure" am I allowed to make my product before the Feds come a-knockin'? And what does a "factory reset" accomplish? The hacker trying to get company IP (or whatever the password is protecting) gets three more attempts at it after the reset? Finally, and I'm not saying this makes it okay, but e-fuses are common as dirt these days. I don't know that you're going to get that toothpaste back in the tube.
- josephcsible 3y ago
  > Because it's a feature customers ask for? Aren't switches to temporarily bypass emissions controls in cars illegal, despite being a feature customers ask for? > What laws do you want written? I want all e-fuses to be banned, as well as any other means for manufacturers to permanently reduce, restrict, or remove functionality from products after they've been sold. > How "secure" am I allowed to make my product before the Feds come a-knockin'? If the one you're trying to make it "secure" against is the product's owner, then I'd say "not at all" would be a fine answer. > And what does a "factory reset" accomplish? The hacker trying to get company IP (or whatever the password is protecting) gets three more attempts at it after the reset? The point is that the factory reset would delete the company IP. > Finally, and I'm not saying this makes it okay, but e-fuses are common as dirt these days. I don't know that you're going to get that toothpaste back in the tube. Wasn't asbestos also as common as dirt before it was banned?
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    > I want all e-fuses to be banned, as well as any other means for manufacturers to permanently reduce, restrict, or remove functionality from products after they've been sold. I am in opposition to this stance. What you're (rightfully) concerned about is when companies do bad things with these mechanisms. But the mechanisms themselves not only have no ethical/moral problems, but are also really useful for all sorts of things that entirely unobjectionable.
    - josephcsible 3y ago
      What legitimate uses are there for e-fuses that can't be done just as well with arbitrarily rewritable storage?
      - JohnFen 3y ago
        Many security applications, situations where you're providing equipment to others and want to make sure it's not modified, etc. It's not that hard to come up with legitimate uses for this. In any case, that sortof doesn't matter. Even if there was no legitimate use for them, that doesn't in and of itself mean they should be illegal. You should at the least demonstrate that their existence is causing great societal harm.
Zak 3y ago
I'm inclined to take the common HN position of "trying to lock people out of modifying their own stuff is bad", however there are plenty of situations in which someone who is not the owner might access an NFC tag and try to make it do things the owner does not want it to. Bricking it seems like the nuclear option, but it's not inherently evil to offer the option of NFC tags that are both tamper-resistant and tamper-evident.
- userbinator 3y ago
  "tamper-evident" would be easily accomplished by completely wiping the contents.
joezydeco 3y ago
Because NXP makes this chip compliant with ISO/IEC14443, meaning it can be used in payment cards. EMV requires shit like this in their credit card NFC and I'm thankful for it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO/IEC_14443 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO/IEC_14443

tonyarkles 3y ago

I'm curious but will totally forget to report back in a few months when mine wears out. I'm... not sure, but somewhat confident that it starts to limit the more aggressive brushing modes once its "worn out", although it's possible it was just gummed up internally with toothpaste residue. Last time I changed the head on mine (Philips Sonicare), it definitely felt significantly more powerful with the replacement head.

goldcd 3y ago
I think it's just that the bristles are all nicely aligned on a new head - after a while they start splaying, so pressure is going in more directions over a larger area. I do love the feeling of a fresh sonicare brush.