Slashdot Mirror
Droid X Self-Destructs If You Try To Mod
An anonymous reader writes with some discouraging news for hack-oriented purchasers of the new Droid X phone: "If the eFuse fails to verify [the firmware information (what we call ROMS), the kernel information, and the bootloader version], then the eFuse receives a command to 'blow the fuse' or 'trip the fuse.' This results in the booting process becoming corrupted, followed by a permanent bricking of the phone. This FailSafe is activated anytime the bootloader is tampered with or any of the above three parts of the phone has been tampered with."
Now people's heads will hurt. Great Job!
Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
Someone will find a way around this very quickly
Does your phone self destruct if you mod it? Where others don't... Droid does!
Seriously, I can understand your warranty being voided if you do unapproved modifications to a device, but designing the device so it blows up if you try to modify it is just wrong.
Why do hardware companies think they should have the right to own the device forever? Why should I buy a device that has a time bomb built in that may trip if the official software gets corrupted due to a bug?
The whole thing reeks. I'm done with Motorola. What is the point of this exactly? What does Motorola lose by you running a custom ROM? New phone sales when they decide after a year not to provide any Android updates?
In this case it's more a case of "Motorola Evil". Google provides the OS but the manufacturer still integrates it into the device.
My next upgrades isn't until December, but I can already say that Droid X is off the table. Hopefully HTC will have out something new and shiny by then. If not, I'll still go for the Incredible over the X. I've had nothing but trouble from Motorola phones anyways.
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
Termite? Methinks maybe thermite?
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
If I purchase the phone outright, wouldn't this be willful destruction of property on Motorola's part? Does a company have the right to destroy a purchased product - after the sale - if the consumer doesn't use it in a prescribed manner?
Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.
Well, it's more of a Motorola issue than an Android issue. Just because an operating system is open doesn't mean the corporation that installed it isn't going to be a jackass.
It's not as if there's no precedent for this. There's a certain operating system based upon open source components from Mach, FreeBSD, GNU, and KDE, which is somewhat infamous for being closed. At least you can load and run your own programs onto the Droid X, even if you can't update the operating system to your own version.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Ah... I guess I won't be buying a DroidX then. Sad, really... I was looking forward to getting one when the contract was up on my Droid.
And I've been very happy with my Droid. Now, one wonders...was this done to suit Verizon or if it was on Moto's own thinking that it was done. I might not have modded my phone when I got it, but doing things like this are a real put-off. I bought the phone, it's mine to do with as I see fit- and putting in things like this take that away from me. It turns it into Motorola's device or Verizon's device and I'm just renting it. Sorry, you SOLD me a phone guys and if you're concerned about "user experience" or "risks to the network" design the damn phone to not need to be concerned about EITHER- and anything else is lying to the customer outright.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
eFUSE is a chip technology developed by IBM is a special type of chip where the code isn't completely static- based on the operation of the device, an eFUSE can blow itself. This can reroute the logic in a variety of ways, or be used as a self destruct mechanism.
It's reversible, but only by Motorola directly via JTAG. They have the custom code needed to flash the chip back to its original state.
Sure they will... But I don't appreciate having them try to transform it more into a rental of the device than a sale- and then framing it in as a sale. I'm sure there's other people that'll view it the same way as I.
Sadly, I'm fairly sure Verizon asked Moto to do this- they always seem to find a way to miss the point and try to assert "control" over everything.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Because of this setup--isn't it entirely possible that some sort of malware can be created to actually attempt to brick the phone by triggering efuse?
A hardware company actually put a self-destruct mechanism in the phone when you change the software.
A. This will get tripped accidentally, even for naive users, and will cost owners money to fix.
B. This violates the idea of ownership of the device. Motorola figures that they're licensing you parts, not selling. For an "open" OS, this is insane.
C. Once you get around it, unless you can destroy the code, you still have that thing hanging around. A mistake or bad combination later on could trip it -- there's no reason to have to put up with walking through a minefield.
All this translates to "Spread the news, blacklist the phone, send a message to Motorola." Because if this goes on as a "who cares" thing, all Motorola Android phones will have it in future and other companies will follow suit.
This needs to be a black eye for Motorola, they need to notice that, and they need to quickly backpedal.
This is just another nail in the coffin for Motorola, who becomes more and more irrelevant every year, being pushed out of the market on both sides by Apple and HTC.
HTC makes the most robust and moddable phones on the planet, and do not try to stop the modding in any way - in fact one may say they passively encourage it.
This post is coming from someone who owns a 4 year old HTC Vogue that came shipped with Windows mobile 6.0, but thanks to the modders, has been upgraded to 6.1 and 6.5, and more recently ove rthe past 3 months, has been running a fully working version of Android that is lightning fast. All on 4 year old hardware.
This is what can be done when you don't shut out your customers - I am an HTC purchaser for life now.
I did follow the TFA to the origin of the story (MyDroidWorld forum), and I still don't see any code, captured data or even a photo of the said eFuse chip inside the DroidX. I understand that the original poster appears to be a reputable hacker, but come on, what kind of real reporting is this? Can anyone else verify these claims? More information needed, thank you very much whoever posts it, because if true, this is an outrage.
Compared to the eFuse, their new iFuse just works, which makes for an infinitely superior bricking experience.
There's also another OS that is based upon open source components from Mach, FreeBSD, GNU and KDE which allows me to install whatever I want without having to jailbreak, root, break bootloaders, etc...Clicky
Move along.
In reality, the main appeal of Android operating systems is that they give phone manufacturers a serious competitor to Apple and they don't have to pay Microsoft. Not to mention, they probably don't care for Windows Mobile.
The problem is that what made the Android OS a serious competitor to Apple was that it wasn't locked. If a phone running Android is locked as tight as an Iphone, I may as well get the Iphone and the "coolness" of owning an Apple product.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
"Written in JTAG" implies a program written in a language called JTAG.
The problem is that JTAG is a standardized electrical communications protocol used to support debugging of ICs, and often also used to program them.
Nothing can be "written in JTAG" because it isn't a programming language. I question whether the poster on that forum has any clue what's really going on. So far the only evidence of this is one forum post that has very little detail and has some glaring technical/grammatical errors (see above). I'll believe it when I see a more in-depth analysis.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
To be fair, OS X doesn't implode if you recompile the bootloader, which is open source under Darwin. You can either download apps for OS X (many free), make your own using Apple-supplied tools (XCode), third-party paid tools (why?), or use free-as-in-speech-and-beer OSS tools.
This can be done in any combination of interfaces, from CLI and X11 to Cocoa and Carbon.
None of this, or even (to make an accurate analogy) installing Windows or Linux on your Mac, is going to make the Mac go boom. In fact, if you buy the system and install the exact same Linux distro as you did on your IBM or Compaq... it'd work.
I hope Motorola get's a nice class-action suit out of this.
Imagine a nice little virus, designed to trigger the 'self-destruct' and some innocent users getting infected.
Markus
A great excuse to stay away from Motorola. It's not the OS, it's the hardware, and only Motorola (that we know of) is doing this crap.
Right. Droid is the Motorola trademark (licensed from Lucasfilm) for their hardware that runs the Android software.
... and then they built the supercollider.
Apparently, this is not the Droid you're looking for.
Except for the Droid Eris and Droid Incredible, which are HTC.
Oh, so we just have to wait a couple of weeks for some teenager to crack it. Awesome.
Unlikely...
If they've put eFuse stuff on the phone, you might be able tapdance around the issue a bit- but the odds are good that if you're modding the phone you'll brick it. And it's liable to brick a few un-modded phones as well. There was a reason they quit using it a while back (this stuff is from the early part the last decade...)- and I'm kind of surprised they brought it back on this phone.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Don't forget that Motorola phones only have a few die-hards working on ROMS. Compare the forum for the CLIQ on modmymoto.com to the ones for HTC devices on xda-developers. The iPhone also has a big jailbreaking/modding scene, and I'm sure there will be a bunch of cool apps on Cydia once iOS 4.1 comes out and is jailbroken.
If I were to buy an Android phone, I'd go with an N1, or the "official" Google stuff. Second choice will be almost any HTC device because they actually put out source and tools to help with modding.
So a guy [p3droid] few know posts a speculative comment
and /. takes it as fact? At least p3droid has the courtesy to warn his readers what a conjecture is and that's all his post is.
Where's you god now, Googlebots? WHERE'S YOUR GOD NOW?
Come over to the iSide, it's shiny!
I've heard that Cyanogen and other groups that do this sort of technical work on Android phones have sworn off the Droid X because options that are equally good as phones and won't make getting a custom ROM on a process that will destroy several phones and be risky every time someone flashes it themselves exist.
This is not the FCC's doing, this is Verizon's. The FCC has no laws against having an open phone. Please put the blame where it belongs!
is that Verizon will be the first one out of the gate with Block C 700MHz LTE service -- which will put them on the spot: they are *required by the terms of the license* -- thanks, Google -- to allow any device that meets their published tech specs to connect to that network.
So if the do this to their handsets for LTE700, then they'll just lose sales *directly*.
Fun to watch massive corporations try to turn on a dime.
Microsoft couldn't do it.
Betcha Verizon can't either.
If that were in true in any way, shape, and form, then every other vendor would be doing the same. Only Motorola is taking this stance.
Which is isolated from the Android environment via serial or USB connection. This lockdown has -nothing- to do with the 3G baseband, which runs on its own processor with its own memory and storage.
eFUSE can be used to change chip logic on the fly based on the operation,, or, as Motorola is using, can be used to modify the programming of the chip itself to render the device nonfunctional without a reflash.
If you could figure out the necessary code to flash to the chip - which wouldn't be easy - yeah, you could reflash the chip via the JTAG port.
Given that HTC and others aren't locking the phones down in a method where the phone deliberately tries to use a device to brick if the phone's firmware/kernel/bootloader is not official, crackers are more likely to ignore the phone. And given the publicity ("Motorola phones have chip that self destructs"), ordinary consumers could be scared off too.
This is Motorola's doing, as HTC's phones have similar security features in the CPU (bootloader encryption is enforced by TrustZone) and yet they don't use it.
Go back a couple years and you can find papers from Motorola discussing how to lock down the user environment against modification. They're all about locking users out of their property.
That opinion... You're holding it wrong.
Baseband firmware's separate from Android. Nobody else locks it down like that, and if Moto was so worried about fiddling with the baseband, then burn it into an non-writable ROM chip. The eFuse is watching for any modifications to the OS Kernel and Bootloader, the "computer bits."
eFUSE can blow itself.
Lucky eFUSE!
Tom Geller
It's like Tivoization: the software is open, but the hardware blocks any changes.
Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
In most Qualcomm processors (The MSM series used in most smartphones/PDA phones), there are dual ARM cores. This isn't a "dual core" system in the traditional sense, the cores are NOT identical and one is designed to handle radio functions and one is designed to handle application functions. On every phone I've seen, the radio is very well protected and the application side far less so. (Which is why, for example, WinMo phones tend to be "SuperCID" unlocked long before they get SIM-unlocked.) The dual-CPU nature makes this kind of protection approach (one side heavily protected, one far less so) much easier than trying to protect only certain code within a single CPU.
However, the Droid X apparently uses a TI OMAP. I'm not sure if these have the same dual-core architecture that the Qualcomm MSMs do. For this reason it may be much harder to be confident about locking down the radio side to enforce SIMlocks and FCC rules without locking down the application side too.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
That's actually pretty much even with other smartphones in its class. The trouble is, most carriers(at least in the US); subsidize handsets but don't offer less expensive plans to those who BYO hardware...
If there were a "zOMG Free Phone* *(with $$$$/month contract)" option and a "Pay full retail phone price, or bring your own, $$/month for voice/data" option, the American preference for crippled carrier phones would be an example of the "stupid consumers, only looking at upfront costs" phenomenon. As it is, though, you pretty much choose between getting a subsidized phone, then having the subsidy(and some extra) gouged out month by month, or you pay full price, and then face exactly the same monthly costs. This adds up to paying a fairly major premium to purchase your own device.
Haha, that reminds me. I recently bricked my Wii, *real* brick by erasing IOS60 (the main "function" that makes the system boot), not even the "preventive" homebrew apps were helpful.
However, it was revived by a simple re-flash of the NAND chip using an specialized programmer.
I doubt this "fuse" brick will be unbreakable
Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
Is all the GPL code in Android under such a version of GPL, that this is legal? I mean, it prevents the user from changing certain parts of the GPL software, something which at least some versions of GPL require, as far as I understand.
I would like to take this moment to give a shout out to T-Mobile, which actually offers a bring your own phone plan for less than the subsidize your phone plan.
Check out my lame java blog at www.javachopshop.com
Isn't this exactly what the GPL v3 is designed to prevent (Tivo-ization)? Seems like FSF's concerns are once again coming true. Too bad Linux won't ever adopt v3, it seems.
Return them and tell Verizon that you're returning them because of the eFuse.
Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
Droid, DroidX, Droid2 and others -- they all have this efuse, it's nothing new. Perhaps rather than making assumptions based on the presence of a device, someone could do some actual research to find out if this is really a concern? Just because the chip is present does not mean it's configured to brick the phone - it certainly hasn't done so in other Android devices using it.
From where I sit, Motorola / Verizon are more evil than Apple / AT&T. Well, OK, AT&T is pretty fucking evil, but the reality is that Apple has never been about open devices and so has never violated any trust with any communities, because iPhone has always been a walled garden. On the other hand Android is wide open, yet they are coupled with Verizon, notorious for locking down phones and removing features, and Motorola who knows fuck all about good software. Android + (Verizon and Motorola) seems like oil and water to me. Plus the Droid-X software seems to not be getting good reviews today: http://gizmodo.com/5587225/motorola-droid-x-review meaning that hacking it is even more desirable.
I still cannot find the droids I am looking for...
I would guess that if Verizon is the one that is requiring this of Motorola, then they are doing it to restrict people's ability to tether 2.2 without having to pay Verizon.
The Android 2.2 platform has built-in wifi tethering that you have to pay your carrier for in order to use, an extra $20/month or some such. Rather than do that, a quick root and install of a free wifi tether app allows the owner to bypass the carrier Tether requirements and build their own little wifi network to access the 'net from any wifi capable device without paying... The data becomes just another set of packets.
If you're looking for a business reason, that's it.
-SM
Please put the blame where it belongs!
Steve Jobs!
The CB App. What's your 20?
Reading comprehension is not your strength is it? 1) p3droid admitted right from the start that it was all guess work but somehow everybody ran with it and concluded that there should be "shame on Motorola" etc, 2) Motorola admitted to locking down the bootloader but not to bricking the phone in case an attempt to replace the bootloader was made. Btw, reports came in that the Droid X does not get bricked when trying to fiddle with the bootloader.
In past days this would be properly seen as a hardware quirk to be worked around. Like a buggy SCSI controller which trashes your disks when you hit it with an obscure command sequence. You don't throw up your hands, foam at the mouth, and threaten the manufacturer! You figure out what you need to do to avoid the undesirable behavior.
My God, you modder people are turning into a bunch of pussies and whiners. THE WHOLE POINT OF WHAT YOU ARE DOING is to have fun and push the hardware into areas it was not meant to go. In this case, the manufacturers have laid a few things in your path to make life interesting. Take it as a challenge, as we've always done in the past, rather than acting like a whiny bitch. My God, the hacker spirit is well and truly dead.
Fuck you. They pointed out that there is exactly that at T-Mobile, and then you turn around and bitch some more? What more do you want?
Welcome to Slashdot, you must be new here!
In case you hadn't noticed, this is a technology site where a large number of people are dedicated to "fucking with stupid shit" on a regular basis. So talking about modding your phone is kind of right up the proverbial alley here...
"But this one goes to 11!"
If I paid for the hardware then it's mine, I own it, in spite of what big telcom wants you to think.
I was actually considering getting this phone, I guess they just lost a customer.
^^vv<><>BA
Options he says...
There's a reason AT&T lost their little lawsuit over the "There's a Map For That" ad campaign that Verizon ran.
There's a reason I don't use AT&T, Sprint, and T-Mobile- I use the "slower" 3G in more places than the others offer.
Since that's the case, I can't very well use an OpenMoko phone until someone makes a CDMA one and then Verizon decides to honor their publicly stated commitment for an "Open Network" that allows me to bring that phone over to their network. I can't as readily take the access hit for the things I do with the phone and go to another network that I could use an OpenMoko phone on.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Not true. When you buy the phone, liquidated damages (something called an "Early Termination Fee") gets tacked on if you don't complete the contract. It's your property the moment the credit card gets swiped through the reader or the cash goes in the register.
By law, if you request that your phone's SIM-lock (if GSM) be removed, or that you be given its MSL code (if it's CDMA), the phone company MUST give it to you as long as 30 days have elapsed since purchase. I'm not 100% sure, but I think even the 30-day waiting period can be eliminated if you waive your right to cancel the plan or return the phone.
American phone companies (at least Verizon and AT&T by virtue of being AT&T's offspring) aren't allowed to keep the phones as secured assets or lease them due to the consent decree that broke up AT&T's monopoly 25 years ago that prohibited them from forcing customers to lease phones instead of purchase them from independent sources on their own. I'm not sure, but I think the FCC incorporated its terms directly into its own regulations, so they probably apply to Sprint & T-Mobile as well. On the other hand, that might be the reason why Verizon was grudgingly forced to open its network to any phone you can physically figure out how to make work, while Sprint can get away with refusing to let anyone use any phone not purchased from Sprint.
I believe the first cell phone companies tried to lease phones to customers, but were prohibited from doing so by the FCC out of concern that if carriers were allowed to lease phones, the price of purchased phones would be wildly inflated and customers would be forced into leasing anyway. As a practical matter, subsidies turned out the same way (in the US, at least, though Google's fought the hard fight to at least try and change it a little).
No, a mortgage is a loan secured by the property. When you buy a phone, even a subsidized phone, you legally own it outright the moment you sign the credit card slip or hand the cashier the money.