New PS3 Firmware Contains Backdoor

AGAIN, Sony? by MarioMax · 2011-02-01 01:50 · Score: 5, Insightful

Didn't you learn from your mistakes the last time you tried this?

Re:AGAIN, Sony? by Dunbal · 2011-02-01 02:21 · Score: 4, Insightful

Yes, they learned it was SO cheap that it's worth doing in all Sony products.

--
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Re:AGAIN, Sony? by hypergreatthing · 2011-02-01 02:44 · Score: 3, Insightful

ohh so you mean besides the sony root kit and remotely disabling blueray player fiasco didn't tell you way in advanced not to buy sony products?
Re:AGAIN, Sony? by Moryath · 2011-02-01 03:04 · Score: 3, Informative

Actually, no. The Xbox360 won't execute code without permission.
The worst it currently does is check that your firmware and the game you are wanting to play are both up to date, and then if either check fails, tells you you will be signed out of Live (but still free to play the game in offline or LAN mode).
Could I see MS doing this in in the future? Possibly. But I really don't think they consider it that big a deal. The people who have a hacked Xbox360 are already pretty much staying offline anyways so it wouldn't do them much good to insert this kind of code.
Re:AGAIN, Sony? by TheGratefulNet · 2011-02-01 03:31 · Score: 4, Insightful

they learned that the kids today will buy anything if its shiny. rootkits? sony music vs the world? optical discs with invasive DRM? annoying copy/read protections? proprietary connectors that cost as much as the unit, itself? remember all that stuff?
wait, hang on:
"oh look, a new video game to keep us distracted. lets get it!"
its impossible to get a boycott going; the 'shininess' wins with today's kids and they do NOT ever vote with their wallets. they buy sony blue ray (no, I'm not spelling it their way), they encourage the DRM with their purchases and sony laughs all the way to the bank.
I can't see any products sony offers that isn't also available elsewhere and better. not the exact same thing, but sony is *fully* boycottable with very little pain involved. its easy to do.
please consider not buying sony. ever. you can find alternatives. you can, really.

--

--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Re:AGAIN, Sony? by The+Living+Fractal · 2011-02-01 03:53 · Score: 2, Informative

You might as well replace "Sony" in your post with any of the top tech companies. Apple is even worse. And yet people have put their market cap at 300 billion. I think it's rather stupid of Sony to spend all this effort doing what they're doing, but I also think it's rather stupid of people like you to get on an internet forum and tell people to consider never buying sony, ever. The vast majority of people who buy a Playstation 3 love it. I own TWO. I love them. Sony wasting its time to prevent me from doing something I was never going to do in the first place is not going to change my experience of owning a PS3, and listening to you I never would've had that experience in the first place.

--
I do not respond to cowards. Especially anonymous ones.
Re:AGAIN, Sony? by bdsesq · 2011-02-01 04:06 · Score: 3

How is Apple worse?
When did they root kit your iPod or iPhone?
Who did they take to court for jail breaking?
The answer is they have not done either of these.
You are free to hate Apple or Sony or MSFT.
Just please be accurate when you rant.
Re:AGAIN, Sony? by Lemmy+Caution · 2011-02-01 04:09 · Score: 2

When the Kinetix was hacked to support the PC, Microsoft not only didn't get legal: they celebrated the achievement. MS has not made a practice of suing its customers. They do check the integrity of your system before allowing you to play online - that strikes me as completely reasonable, as part of a TOS for an online service - but they don't sue you if you hack your system, nor force your system to upgrade if you don't want to.
Re:AGAIN, Sony? by WWWWolf · 2011-02-01 04:17 · Score: 2

I'm pretty sure the 360 has a similar feature that has been there for a while now...
That's true - modded 360s get banned from XBL over somewhat similar mechanism. And Nintendo seems to release Wii firmware updates that do shit-all except nuke homebrew. (Don't ask me for details, I've never run Wii homebrew. But I've seen damn-a-lot of firmware updates! Oh, the excitement of seeing awesome free updates from Nintendo and not seeing any new features whatsoever!)

why only bash Sony for it? Its not like MS has a history of empowering consumers.
Two reasons: Sony has had history with this stuff. The backlash against them when they tried to put rootkits in their DRM'd *ahem* superficially CD-like audio media products, and how they handled that crisis, was a very sorry cavalcade of sheer idiocy. Reason 2: PS3 has come a really long way down. Originally it was an epic super-console that was supposed to do everything and anything and run Linux. Features have gone, Linux support was scrapped retroactively, and now Sony apparently has shown, very clearly, that they're not cool with homebrew and all tampering will be dealt with. I've stuck here with Nintendo and MS - at least they've been honestly claiming their consoles are closed platforms the whole time. I've gotten exactly what it says in the package.
Re:AGAIN, Sony? by Eivind+Eklund · 2011-02-01 04:17 · Score: 4, Interesting

Well, I personally don't accept Sony stealing from their customers *even though this time that customer wasn't me*.
Sony first advertised OtherOS (combined with the ability to play new games and the ability to get on PSN) and then removed this.
Theft.
I don't voluntarily give money to thieves, even if they so far haven't stolen from me.
So I've boycotted Sony, and they can say bye bye to the $1000+ per year I used to spend with them.
Whether "lots of people" are happy with them is immaterial - I was happy with what they delivered, until they started stealing from people.

--
Doubting the existence of evolution is like doubting the existence of China: It just shows that you're uninformed.
Re:AGAIN, Sony? by hazydave · 2011-02-01 06:02 · Score: 2

I do agree... Sony sells the best dedicated console, and even with this move, the most open. It is not in my best interest as a user for them to make stealing software any easier, so I really have no problem, if that's the extent of their use for this interface. And given "secret" update pushes already documented in Windows, I think there's an excellent chance that Sony was, until just now, the only one NOT doing this kind of thing already.
On the other hand, I used to be a big fan of Sony media players, televisions, and camcorders. Today, not-so-much, and that's primarily because others have just made better kit. Sony has long refused to support anything but 1080/60i on their consumer and even some pro-level camcorders... I'm getting 1080/24p, 720/60p, 1080/30p, and 1080/60p on at least one of the two Panasonic camcorders I bought to replace my Sonys. My Sony TV was replaced first by a Mitsubishi, then a Samsung, for the media room... long ago. My last Sony TV lost its place to an LG-LCD last Christmas. And that Sony MD recorder was replaced by Tascam and Samson (Zoom) digital field recorders, and my smartphone, when it comes to play back.
And in fact, one reason they're better products... many of these all use the same SD/microSD memory cards. Even my PS3 supports these. My digital field recorders let me transfer audio directly to my PC... the "WebMD" recorder could have supported this, or MP3 native, but Sony was worried about protecting me from my own live recordings.
In short, nothing magical about the company, any more than any other company. I choose products based on features offered and company reputation, but I had no need to reject Sony based on policies... their products were enough.
As for Blu-ray, that's a big over HD-DVD. While it might not have been obvious to those not in the video world, at least Blu-ray was spun out from Sony to a standards group. While certainly under the auspices of the DVD Forum, HD-DVD was effectively a Toshiba/Microsoft proprietary format. The reason no one but Toshiba made HD-DVD players (other than a couple Samsung BD players hacked to play a subset of the HD-DVD format as well) was simple: Toshiba treated HD-DVD like their own gaming console. They could sell the players at or below cost, because they were collecting the royalties on each disc, just as Sony, MS, and Nintendo do on their respective consoles. No other hardware company could make money on HD-DVD... this same experiment was tried in the 90s with the 3DO gaming platform, with identical results.

--
-Dave Haynie
Re:AGAIN, Sony? by thunderclap · 2011-02-01 09:43 · Score: 2

I see you don't have the scrot to admit you don't like Hacking, eh? Once you legally exchange money for the product, they shouldn't say anything about using the product period. Honestly, I saw nothing wrong with what Geohot and the rest of them did. Its his system. he wanted to tear it apart. He showed everyone how. Problem isn't 'the people who think they can piss wherever they want and get away with it' (because the homeless and drunks will always do that). It's the fact that Sony didn't want anyone to reveal that. They lose that right when they release the object to the masses. As long as no one makes a new one and claims its there, they should have a leg to stand on. This is how bad everything has gotten.

IRC by Ogive17 · 2011-02-01 01:51 · Score: 5, Informative

Wow, the "source" for this speculation is an IRC conversation.

Not that I respect Sony considering what they've done in the past but I think I'll hold off judgement for a bit longer on this one.

--
"Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."

Re:IRC by hedwards · 2011-02-01 01:55 · Score: 2

I'm with you on that, Sony definitely isn't above doing this sort of thing, but personally I'm going to wait until there's more information available before updating my firmware just in case. Personally, I won't be buying anything more from Sony after this. If they think that they can treat me like this they can pretty much just fuck themselves with the longest, pointiest, hottest poker they can find.
Re:IRC by dc29A · 2011-02-01 01:59 · Score: 4, Insightful

I don't beleive Sony are that dumb. A backdoor pretty much opens the PS3 not just to Sony but hackers and most importantly malware writers. PS3 botnet anyone?
Re:IRC by ElectricTurtle · 2011-02-01 02:08 · Score: 4, Informative

As many have alluded and will allude to in this discussion, they *are* that dumb, as evidenced by the fact that they did it before.

--
I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
Re:IRC by MacGyver2210 · 2011-02-01 02:16 · Score: 2

I think a botnet would be just about the best use possible for that heaping pile of shit.

--
If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
Re:IRC by commodore64_love · 2011-02-01 02:17 · Score: 2

>>>I think I'll hold off judgement for a bit longer on this one.
Has Sony done anything worthwhile?
- invented CD.
- invented Playstation and broke the NES/SNES monopoly.
the end
I was planning to get a PS3 once the price dropped, but now I think I'll just continue playing my PS2 and 1 games. The Nintendo Wii is looking pretty attractive (although I hate playing Sonic with that damn controller that doesn't register my inputs). Or maybe an Xbox 360.
Any PS3 games that will not play on the 360? Or maybe just quit consoles and try computer gaming again. Haven't touched a computer game since the 32-bit Amiga era.

--
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Re:IRC by LordLimecat · 2011-02-01 02:21 · Score: 2, Informative

Actually, they HAVENT done that before-- read the article you linked. That was a rootkit, not a backdoor; they are related but seperate. The BMG rootkit did not allow remote code execution; it instead took measures to hide its activity from visibility, causing havoc with some CD drives and assisting some viruses in the process.
Rootkit=/= backdoor. I know its fun to hate on Sony, and I fully support such positions, but lets not distort the truth here.
Re:IRC by JackDW · 2011-02-01 02:22 · Score: 2, Insightful

In the absence of effective hardware security, this is the only way to stop people cheating in online games. This has become a big problem on the PS3 since the jailbreak enabled it.
On the PC, where there was never any hardware security to prevent cheating, publishers have been using the same technique for many years. Consider Blizzard Warden, Punkbuster, and Valve Anti Cheat. All of these allow the publisher - or their authorised agents - to download and run code on your machine when you connect to the online service.
Now Sony's platform is thoroughly broken, Sony has to adopt Punkbuster/VAC/Warden-style technology. It's either that, or suffer a mass exodus of players to other platforms which will be free of cheats.

--
You're an immobile computer, remember?
Re:IRC by erroneus · 2011-02-01 02:24 · Score: 3, Insightful

You mean their track record for shoddy products, crappy product support, the previous rootkit installs and their close ties with the RIAA haven't been reason enough for you?
Re:IRC by commodore64_love · 2011-02-01 02:35 · Score: 2

Nope. Sony's design was rejected. So were most other 3 or 3.5 inch variants. The final Floppy was based on a conglomeration of multiple companies, similar to how the DVD was created.
Somebody else wrote:
>>>What monopoly?
NES had over 90% share of the market. SNES was closer to a 50-50 share with Sega Genesis/megadrive.

--
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Re:IRC by ElectricTurtle · 2011-02-01 02:48 · Score: 4, Informative

Never did I say rootkit==backdoor. The parent I was replying to was saying that Sony wouldn't do a thing that opened the PS3 to malware writers, and the rootkit, by *your* own example "assisting some viruses in the process" did exactly ... what? The same thing. Before. Do you get it yet?

--
I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
Re:IRC by webmosher · 2011-02-01 03:12 · Score: 2, Informative

I cannot attest to the current quality of Sony products, as I have refused to even look at their products for 15 years (well before all this rootkit business).
I was bilked by their shoddy products many years ago, and discovered then that Sony has very distinct lines of products: 1) High end... which are probably worth it, but which I will not touch simply because I think other companies provide better products for the same price point and 2) everything else, which is at various price points. While the external style of these various products is quite good, I personally feel the internal electronics are no better than buying bargain electronics brands like Emerson, RCA, etc.
Just my opinion though.
Re:IRC by realityimpaired · 2011-02-01 03:27 · Score: 2

Not going to name a lot of names, but I recently bought a Panasonic Blu-Ray player... while rooting around in the system menus I found, not even buried that deeply (only 2 menus in), an abridged copy of the GPL and LGPL, with links to where I can go to read the full license (on gnu.org), and an e-mail address and snail mail address where I can request the full source code for the player.
It came with the caveat that they would wait until the product had been on the market for 3 years in order to protect their ability to market the product... that's reasonable, IMO. And when you compare that to the actions of other companies, like, for example, Sony, well... 'nuf said. In terms of the electronics that're actually inside the equipment, there's only a bare handful of actual manufacturers... the real point which sets the two apart is their actions as a corporate entity, and given the choice, I'd go for LG or Panasonic over Sony any day of the week.
Re:IRC by Entropius · 2011-02-01 03:46 · Score: 3, Informative

Panasonic, for one.
I used to have a Panasonic digital camera, of the "superzoom" type. The lens (which had the fastest aperture of any superzoom lens available) incorporated anomalous-dispersion glass and was well-designed, and thus had pretty low levels of chromatic aberration; the residual chromatic aberration had been characterized by the lens designer and was cleaned up in software in the camera. For what it was, it took amazing pictures.
Sony made a competing product. It had all sorts of shiny stuff advertised on the box -- lots of megapixels, various gee-whiz modes, "smile shutter", all sorts of stuff that can be marketed -- but the lens was *shit*, with nutty amounts of chromatic aberration, so it didn't matter what you did with it -- you weren't going to take good pictures at the long end of that lens, gee-whiz stuff or no, because the lens sucked.
Re:IRC by index0 · 2011-02-01 03:57 · Score: 2

You do know if you installed any Ps3 firmware after Dec2009, you agreed to a EULA that has the following:
"To the extent permitted by applicable law, your rights to use or access the current version of the System Software will cease upon installation of a newer version of the System Software onto your PS3 system, whether such installation occurs through manual or automatic download by SCE through SCE's online network, or otherwise."
Re:IRC by Zelgadiss · 2011-02-01 04:42 · Score: 2

He asked

Any PS3 games that will not play on the 360?
not

Any 3rd party PS3 games that will not play on the 360?
Hence I saw no reason to exclude Sony 1st party exclusives.
Re:IRC by drinkypoo · 2011-02-01 06:07 · Score: 2

invented CD.
The work was done by Sony and Philips engineers. I worked with one of the key engineers (well, I was in IT, so it is more accurate to say I worked alongside or perhaps near him) at Silicon Engineering. This story would be a lot cooler if I could remember who it was.

invented Playstation and broke the NES/SNES monopoly.
I guess you forgot about Sega, which had a quite successful business selling video games at the time. The Playstation forced them to reevaluate their strategy and they developed the Dreamcast, perhaps their first console that was really designed for ease of development. Then Sony published specs they knew to be total bullshit which showed their console to be twice as powerful as the Dreamcast, when in reality it was about as powerful, which had a chilling effect on DC sales. They murdered Sega (as a hardware company) with fraudulent specifications. (They also overkilled Lik-Sang, for which I can never forgive them.)
If you don't want to do multiplayer single-screen gaming, then you should just head back to PC/Windows gaming. Try to avoid Steam if you can, it's such a damned hassle.
If you do want to do multiplayerblahblahblah you should definitely get a Wii with MotionPlus, which is in my opinion an entirely different experience. Stick to only titles which will make use of it and be happy. I find that there is substantial jitter in the direct pointing no matter what I do, but stuff like bowling went from meh to fantastic when I got to use the MP. I barely use my Wii because it doesn't have MP and it annoys me... it's on the list I guess.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"

Sony??!? by elrous0 · 2011-02-01 01:54 · Score: 4, Funny

But such a control-freak move seems so out of character for Sony. I mean, Sony installing an intrusive backdoor that could potentially be abused, just to fight a few pirates? I can't think of a precedent for that.

--
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.

Re:Sony??!? by Megane · 2011-02-01 02:02 · Score: 2

Woosh! The sarcasm passed right over your head. You even missed what was really being hinted at, the CD rootkit fiasco.

--
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }

Not a rootkit by Lord+Byron+II · 2011-02-01 01:56 · Score: 5, Informative

The "article" calls this a rootkit. The summary calls it a backdoor. Neither is strictly true.

Rootkits allow unauthorized users root level access and backdoors allow unauthorized remote users access. In this case, you're installing Sony software and this software allows Sony to autoupdate their software and remove cracks. This isn't much different from Chrome autoupdating or Firefox blacklisting certain extensions. The only real difference is that Sony might not have been all that forthcoming about the fact that this new firmware has this capability. My guess is that if you look at the EULA carefully, it does specify that they are allowed to do this.

I would suggest that if you think they have trampled on your rights, then take them to court. Sony will just keep making their firmware more and more "evil" until a sizable number of users stands up and says "no more".

Re:Not a rootkit by Svartalf · 2011-02-01 02:17 · Score: 2

Actually, your definitions are not accurate...
Rootkits allow remote users, authorized or not, clandestine root level access to a system without any auditing showing when it occurred- it injects the following into a system.
Backdoors allow a remote user a way into the system outside of the security and auditing of a system.
Neither of these require "unauthorized" users to be using them- and Sony claiming it's "authorized" to do so through it's PSN EULA does not negate that it's pretty much a backdoor that was not there before that was inserted via a recent firmware update. There is likely to be no real security management within this framework (heh...they didn't get the rootkit right or their PS3 security system right, what makes anyone think this will be any different?) and the moment someone wiresharks the protocol Sony's using for this thing, the bad guys will be able to do worse to you, including probably pushing botnet updates to the boxes. Real smart. One more boneheaded thing in a string of them from Sony. You'd have thought they'd have learned from the rootkit fiasco about this stuff, but noooo...

--
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Re:Not a rootkit by Svartalf · 2011-02-01 02:21 · Score: 4, Interesting

Actually, that sort of verbiage can negate a contract or agreement. It has to have a definitive nature at the time of agreement and it needs notice for the change so you can either negotiate new terms or end the same if you don't agree with the new changes. Any verbiage that allows the contract to change so much on a whim as you're implying renders the contract null and void as there's no way to be able to be in compliance with the terms at any given time.

--
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Re:Not a rootkit by halcyon1234 · 2011-02-01 02:54 · Score: 3, Insightful

This isn't much different from Chrome autoupdating or Firefox blacklisting certain extensions.
It wouldn't be-- if Firefox removed the optional "Check for Updates" setting, changed your hosts.txt file and router's routing table, added no new features with the update, and would only show cached, offline pages until you submitted to the update.
So except for nearly everything being different, it's exactly the same.

--
UTF-8: There and Back Again

I'm not so sure this is wrong anymore by MogNuts · 2011-02-01 01:57 · Score: 2, Insightful

I don't know anymore. We know why they are doing this. To stop developers from thinking that the platform is dead to develop for because there will be rampant piracy.

And to stop cheaters. I'll tell you, I've just recently gotten into online shooters lately (MoH and COD:BO), and I'll tell you, I swear to god the amount of hacks and cheaters* just makes me not want to even bother.

I'm almost siding with Sony on this one. It's almost to the point that you have to buy as soon as it comes out and then you have a window of enjoyment of a month. Then it's worthless. To me, what's the point?

Re:I'm not so sure this is wrong anymore by Lord+Byron+II · 2011-02-01 02:04 · Score: 3, Interesting

Yeah, I think the only thing that Sony has done wrong is remove the "Other OS" option. They probably should not have included it in the first place. But other than that, Sony has basically sold you:
-A black box capable of playing games
-You have to pay $60 per new game
-If you want to play online, you can't cheat
This firmware doesn't change any of this, so why get upset? If you wanted a general purpose computer that you control the software stack on, then buy a PC and roll your own Linux kernel.
Re:I'm not so sure this is wrong anymore by Svartalf · 2011-02-01 02:42 · Score: 3, Informative

Actually, the firmware mod opens it up to being further hacked (Do remember that they lost positive control of the ROOT signing key...meaning that ANYONE can MITM their update chain now...) as now hackers can put and remove things at will on their boxes. This means we should see the beginnings of PS3 Botnets all over the place eventually.
And this would make the second wrong move from Sony, with the OtherOS being removed being the first.

--
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas

Re:They should have bought a real computer. by clang_jangle · 2011-02-01 02:01 · Score: 2

The wireless providers know only this model, and their business is booming. Don't think this isn't the future of all consumer-level computing. The freedom was nice while it lasted...

--
Caveat Utilitor

I bought my PS3 dammit! by onyxruby · 2011-02-01 02:02 · Score: 4, Insightful

Is it just me, or I could swear that I 'bought' my ps3 and it said nothing about a cable box like rental on the box. Why is it so hard for Sony to understand that this is my property and to leave it well enough alone? If they want to arbitrarily execute code on other people's property it crosses the line to hacking and that's criminal to in most jurisdictions.

What they have done is no different that the cable company demanding root level access to your computer in order to go online. People would be outraged there, why should a game console (which is just a dedicated computer) be any different?

Re:They should have bought a real computer. by lavers · 2011-02-01 02:14 · Score: 2

I'm just holding out hope that "real" computers will at least remain available to those who know what they're looking for. Might get to the point where we have to build them from scratch in our basements again...

In that case... don't buy a PS4 ;-) by Lonewolf666 · 2011-02-01 02:17 · Score: 2

I know it does not exist yet, but a few years from now, there will probably a PS4 because the PS3 is becoming obsolete.
At that point, everybody should remember that Sony is managed by assholes and cannot be trusted...

--
C - the footgun of programming languages

Bash.org by definate · 2011-02-01 02:21 · Score: 4, Insightful

Bash.org archiving reliable reporting sources since Wednesday February 02, @12:16AM.

Such as ...
Cthon98's expose on gullibility and technological literacy
erno's scandal on the misappropriated resources
CRCError's report on the abuses of power
DragonflyBlade21's critique on the human condition

... and of course entertainment news...
JonJonB's review of Harry Potter

--
This is my footer. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

Re:They should have bought a real computer. by peppepz · 2011-02-01 02:30 · Score: 2

I share your fear.

I'm fine if Apple's tablets run a special-purpose, consumer-only OS that limits your freedom. If the Mac shows signs of going in the same direction, I have a bad feeling. If then Google releases a netbook with a locked boot loader that will only load Chrome OS, which in turn requires you to log in with your Google Account upon power up, I start to worry.

Perhaps RMS wasn't so paranoid when he warned against "the cloud" after all.

Re:Maybe, Maybe not by Svartalf · 2011-02-01 02:31 · Score: 2

The problem is that if they don't call out that they're doing this change and make it clear instead of in the fine print, it may negate their EULA as some of this is really non-enforceable from start to finish. You must, for example, give ample notice that you're changing the terms and doing it in a firmware update isn't it. (Makes the change non-enforceable...) Also, just because they can claim they can do this in the EULA doesn't mean they're legally allowed to do it. It's a sold item. It's roughly analogous (to use the classic /. bad car analogy...) to Ford coming to your house after you bought your car to forcibly update the firmware on your Fusion's onboard electronics to ensure that only Ford parts and firmware are running in the vehicle- after the sale of the car and telling you that their EULA allows them to change this and you've no say other than to sell the car. Bad car analogy it might be, but it's analogous- and when you run it through your head that way, you should have issues with it as will the courts (if you can get competent counsel that is...not all attornies are cut from the same bolt of cloth...)

--
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas

Re:Companies are Collections of Individuals & by click2005 · 2011-02-01 03:08 · Score: 2

Isn't that like saying that you didn't beat someone to death your right hand did.

A CEO should be held responsible for the actions of the company they run. Isn't that one of the reasons they earn those multi-million dollar pay packets.

--
I am a free slashdotter. I will not be modded, blogged, DRM'd, patented, podcasted or RFID'd. My life is my own.

Re:Companies are Collections of Individuals & by BlueStrat · 2011-02-01 03:52 · Score: 2, Informative

A CEO should be held responsible for the actions of the company they run. Isn't that one of the reasons they earn those multi-million dollar pay packets.

Of course not, silly person!

They earn those millions because they won the "race-to-the-bottom" against all the other corrupt, amoral corporate executives competing for the position by being the most ruthless and amoral in their pursuit of money and power.

It's rather like a twisted "executive Darwinism" that's encouraged and enabled in the US by corrupt Progressive politicians in BOTH parties that have abandoned the Constitution and the rule of law starting about 100 years ago and having grown worse every year since because people can't be bothered to pay attention, educate and inform themselves, and then do something about voting them out.

Strat

--
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.

Re:Companies are Collections of Individuals & by Zelgadiss · 2011-02-01 03:58 · Score: 2

Actually I don't think people from different divisions of Sony talk to each other much.

Sony seems to be more a group of companies under one name, than a giant mammoth working in sync.

Some of their divisions don't seem to even get along. etc Sony music vs Sony electronics
It appears it has been like this for decades...

Hence I try not to punish one division for the sins of another, because chances are they had nothing to do with it.

Re:Fanboys make me Laugh by Zelgadiss · 2011-02-01 04:20 · Score: 2

The Sony and Apple bashing on Slashdot is getting retarded.

Every time some news (and even unconfirmed rumours) comes up, everyone flies into knee-jerk mode and start inventing silly worst case scenarios - most which don't even make any sense from a business perspective for the said companies.

Re:Genesis does what Nintendon't by metalgamer84 · 2011-02-01 04:56 · Score: 2

This is why I stick with my old DOS games, which are still tons of fun. Thanks to DOSBox, any current system can play all the old games.

Not Just For Network Access!!! by Will+Call+Again · 2011-02-01 05:51 · Score: 2

This "Rootkit" or whatever you want to call it contacts sony servers the minute that it is booted...Not just when you access PSN... And it will continue to retry ports until it has exhausted all of them. This is without even attempting to login to their servers(PSN)....So I'm totally against this...as it is a major violation of my privacy......I'm still confused tho....The $600 I paid is for a rental? At least that is how it feels at this point considering they change it all the time and give me no choice whether I want these changes or not...

Re:Companies are Collections of Individuals & by kbolino · 2011-02-01 12:17 · Score: 2

You really ought to study your history a little more, and I say this as someone at least sympathetic to your claim. Vanderbilt, Carnegie, Rockefeller, and Morgan, titans all, were no less ruthless than today's corporate executives, and all of them started over 150 years ago. The government was drastically different then, but don't delude yourself into thinking that it was less manipulable, or that these men didn't take advantage of every loophole and extralegal arrangement they could get their hands on. Nor should you think that politicians were all upstanding individuals who would never collude with massive corporations; such deals are the backbone of the American economy, then just as much as now. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to vilify Vanderbilt et al., they were all philanthropists and very smart men, but that does not mean they weren't among the most ruthless businessmen to ever walk this Earth.

And in regards to the parent post, corporate executives are accountable for the actions of the company. They are accountable to the board of directors and more importantly to the shareholders. No CEO walked away from a failing corporation with a massive bonus that wasn't approved by the shareholders, although that approval most likely came as a term of employment made when the company was still in the black. To suggest that a corporate executive should be held accountable to an extra-corporate body (like a government) for the actions of the corporation at large (rather than just his own actions) is to fail to understand the purpose of a corporation. A corporation is not a sole proprietorship, and a CEO is not a dictator. If the CEO encourages or engages in illegal behavior, then he has committed a personal crime and can be accused, tried, and convicted of such. If the company engages in illegal or unethical behavior, without the direct (demonstrable) support or involvement of the CEO, then a government can take action against the corporation (such as fining it, dividing it, disbanding it, or even nationalizing it, depending on the laws), but it cannot take action against the CEO (assuming that contract law carries weight in the country where the corporation resides, as in most of the world).

Slashdot Mirror

New PS3 Firmware Contains Backdoor

52 of 491 comments (clear)