4 ms·

I think that at the moment the kill switch is more for protecting the data on the phone, rather than protecting the phone from being reused. For the common thie

by gremy 12y ago

I think that at the moment the kill switch is more for protecting the data on the phone, rather than protecting the phone from being reused. For the common thief, this will be an inconvenience in probably reselling the phone, but there will always be hackers out there who will be able to reinstall the OS. Also as far as I know Carries can blacklist Phones based on IMEI. So the kill switch could also trigger the Carrier blacklisting. I think that iPhones already have something built in for this.

victorhooi 12y ago
I believe the idea is that you can't just reinstall the OS to circumvent it. Apple currently does this with their activation - if the phone gets remotely locked by the user, it can't be unlocked without knowing the password, and no amount of reinstalling, wiping, or praying to your deity will be enough to unlock it. As far as I'm aware, there aren't any known vulnerabilities with Apple's scheme - I don't know how long this will remain true. I'm curious how this will be implemented on the Android side (also considering that Google is headquartered in CA - but I don't know if that changes anything). Android phones are known for their open-ness, and on many models, unlocked boot loaders. I wonder how you'd securely lock it down so you couldn't wipe it, like you describe.
- jordanthoms 12y ago
  Presumably it'd act as an extension of how it works now - the phone is shipped with a locked bootloader, and has to be unlocked by a computer which wipes the phone in the process. So the bootloader could require a code which is generated by Google to do that unlock, and Google could keep a list of 'killed' phones not to generate unlock codes for. The challenge would be to prevent that expanding into a wider scheme to stop users having control over their devices.

4 ms·

I think that at the moment the kill switch is more for protecting the data on the phone, rather than protecting the phone from being reused. For the common thie

by gremy 12y ago

victorhooi 12y ago
I believe the idea is that you can't just reinstall the OS to circumvent it. Apple currently does this with their activation - if the phone gets remotely locked by the user, it can't be unlocked without knowing the password, and no amount of reinstalling, wiping, or praying to your deity will be enough to unlock it. As far as I'm aware, there aren't any known vulnerabilities with Apple's scheme - I don't know how long this will remain true. I'm curious how this will be implemented on the Android side (also considering that Google is headquartered in CA - but I don't know if that changes anything). Android phones are known for their open-ness, and on many models, unlocked boot loaders. I wonder how you'd securely lock it down so you couldn't wipe it, like you describe.
- jordanthoms 12y ago
  Presumably it'd act as an extension of how it works now - the phone is shipped with a locked bootloader, and has to be unlocked by a computer which wipes the phone in the process. So the bootloader could require a code which is generated by Google to do that unlock, and Google could keep a list of 'killed' phones not to generate unlock codes for. The challenge would be to prevent that expanding into a wider scheme to stop users having control over their devices.