Slashdot Mirror


Some Reversible USB-C Cables/Adapters Could Cause Irreversible Damage

TheRealHocusLocus writes: Three Decembers ago I lauded the impending death of the trapezoid. Celebration of the rectangle might be premature however, because in the rush-to-market an appalling number of chargers, cables and legacy adapters have been discovered to be non-compliant. There have been performance issues with bad USB implementation all along, but now — with improved conductors USB-C offers to negotiate up to 3A in addition the 900ma base, so use of a non-compliant adapter may result in damage. Google engineer and hero Benson Leung has been waging a one-man compliance campaign of Amazon reviews to warn of dodgy devices and praise the good. Reddit user bmcclure937 offers a spreadsheet summary of the reviews. It's a jungle out there, don't get fried.

35 of 136 comments (clear)

  1. Stupid design by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you're relying on the cable having enough intelligence to prevent the two devices from hurting each other, you've already messed things up.

    1. Re:Stupid design by bondsbw · · Score: 4, Funny

      Some Reversible USB-C Cables/Adapters Could Cause Irreversible Damage

      The irony that USB is finally reversible, yet the damage it causes is not...

      --
      All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
    2. Re:Stupid design by x0ra · · Score: 5, Informative

      TFA's title is mislieading. The cable in question was wrongly wired. If you connect GND to V+, and V+ to GND, bad things *will* happen even with USB 1.0.

    3. Re:Stupid design by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      I would like to correct you on the "cheaped out" as the guy already found and owns several quality cables. It was his choice to spend his time evaluating various cables from a litany of manufacturers to see if they complied with the USB specifications, hardly a case of trying to be cheap. As for the "POS" device, the power rails of the USB port are hooked up to several internal circuits. Most of which can survive a lot of abuse, but reverse voltage is not one that all the components lived through. In fact, if you look through the datasheets for most components you will quickly realize that being able to survive reverse voltage is actually somewhat rare. Fuses would have done squat to save him in this situation.

      Also I would advise you to read a bit more closely to his account of how the devices fried. 2 of them went up at once and the 3rd one went in a 2nd attempt. So really it was somewhat understandable that 3 devices were toasted. Though to your point, he (Leung) should have done a continuity check before any of those cables EVER saw a real device. Especially so given that he is purposely buying cables from all reaches of the earth to test them out.

      It also doesn't seem like said engineer is waging a holy war. From what I can see he posted it to his own personal G+ page and the news has just been spreading around as various sites picked up on it. I do agree that this is old news, its sad to see that journalism has degraded into retelling the same story over and over.

    4. Re: Stupid design by Spazmania · · Score: 4, Informative
      --
      Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
    5. Re: Stupid design by WarJolt · · Score: 2

      You know how many times I've seen EEs blow up hardware hooking things up backwards?

      In the software world I see EEs cast datatypes every which way breaking the type safety. EEs that I know just don't understand that people will try to hook things up backwards and they should be protected from it. Compiler protect us when we aren't abusing the type system.

      We mix up type C connectors all the time now, so clearly the type safety is broken. We casted it into a host connector.

    6. Re:Stupid design by x0ra · · Score: 2

      we're not talking about over current, we're talking about simple wrong polarity.

    7. Re:Stupid design by tlhIngan · · Score: 2

      This is design 101. We've been Poka-yoke-ing connectors in other industries for decades.

      In fact, if you look through the datasheets for most components you will quickly realize that being able to survive reverse voltage is actually somewhat rare

      Because you're supposed to build it in Most components only do one thing and do it well. You build your own protection circuit. The ECMs we use at work will take 1000V on any pin. Could you imagine how far your car would make it without any protection circuits built in?

      Poka-yoke illustrates this connector pefectly - USB-C works either way so it doesn't matter which way you plug in the cable and which way it goes.

      In fact, USB-C to USB-C cables are not the issue. It's USB-A to USB-C cables which cause the issues.

      As for your ECU - you build them to those specs, but you pay a lot more money for an engine computer. Try to build your ECU for $5 and make a profit and you'll probably compromise a lot of things.

    8. Re:Stupid design by Khyber · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Current doesn't kill silicon, voltage does. Example, you take an LED. It's a red one that runs at 2V. You can probably dump 3-4x that voltage through it without a resistor, and it won't care as long as the polarity is correct and it has adequate heat sinking. Now, this same LED has a reverse breakdown voltage. Many LEDs now days have native protection about double their nominal operative voltage. So for this LED, it can take upwards of ~4V reverse polarity. You give it 5V or higher in reverse, you will destroy the p-n junction.

      This knowledge is what is used to design LED arrays which can run natively off wall power without any power driver circuitry.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    9. Re:Stupid design by aXis100 · · Score: 2

      Diodes cause an undesirable voltage drop in low voltage circuits like this. Even Schottky diodes at 0.2V or so is still significant.

      A FET however is a resistive device and can be as low as a few milliOhm. This means much lower voltage drop on the sorts of currents you'd see with USB.

    10. Re:Stupid design by Grishnakh · · Score: 4, Informative

      The second one is the device is dropping voltage and consuming power. In standard USB with 500mA at 5V, if the MOSFET takes 1V, that's half a watt of power you're losing in the transistor. (And really, you just use a diode). USB-C with up to 100W, you're looking at losing a lot of power in your reverse protection components.

      100% wrong.

      The MOSFET is not a diode. Diodes DO cause a 0.6-1V drop. That's why they use a MOSFET instead here in applications where a diode drop is too much. The MOSFET only drops as much as its internal Ron on-resistance allows. For a high-grade MOSFET, that can be in the single milliohms, so it's effectively a dead short. Cheapo MOSFETs are still in the low tens of milliohms. So with 3A of power, that's 1/4W with a crappy 30mohm MOSFET, or 72mW with one with a 8mohm on-resistance. The only reason you'd leave this out if reverse polarity is at all possible is cheapness.

  2. Timothy you've mentioned this before.. by sims+2 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Timothy you've mentioned this before..
    http://hardware.slashdot.org/s...

    --
    Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    1. Re:Timothy you've mentioned this before.. by rsmith-mac · · Score: 2

      To be fair to Timothy, up until now Benson had never received a cable that was so incorrectly built that it killed his testing equipment and a laptop. To find a cable that bad, that's news.

  3. Re:Essentially a dupe from 3 months ago by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is a new development. Benson Leung found a cable so bad it destroyed his analyzing equipment, and he says he won't be able to do reviews anymore because of it. The cable was actually missing wires internally, among other things.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  4. Test your equipment by jgotts · · Score: 5, Informative

    When it comes to USB, test your equipment, even if you haven't upgraded to Type C yet.

    I've personally discovered two counterfeit or substandard (depending upon your personal definitions of the terms) USB charging cables.

    What I use to test is a Samsung Galaxy Tab 3 10-inch tablet. This tablet wants approximately 0.7-0.8 amps at 5 volts, but it will charge in a degraded mode if the charging cable isn't up to snuff, or if it's plugged into a desktop or laptop (which normally only supply 0.5 amps).

    Every cable should begin by charging in the degraded mode when plugged into my laptop and then upgrade to normal charging mode when plugged into any of my half dozen or so 2 amp USB chargers. Among over a dozen cables, I detected two that were not up to snuff, and you'd be surprised at my results. One cable from the dollar store was garbage, but another, colored cable from the dollar store that had fancy LEDs was fine. Three 10 feet cables were fine. The other reject was an average-looking cable with an average feel. It did not appear to be substandard or counterfeit.

    If you want to get fancy you can get a device from banggood.com that measures current and voltage across the USB port. They cost about $3 shipped. That is how I determined that my tablet will draw approximately 0.7-0.8 amps. From that experience I'd be surprised if many devices actually draw a full 2 amps. It's nice to have a 2 amp supply, though, because it gives you a safety factor if your cables are somewhat substandard. Maybe the newest 2016 phones will draw close to 2 amps. Get the meter and find out!

    Based upon my experience, the best USB chargers are from Samsung and anything else that has a counterfeit-resistant UL sticker. And also based upon my experience, if you notice that a charging cable is getting warm, you should probably replace it because it's dissipating electricity as heat rather than conducting it.

  5. Not a USB 3 problem by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

    This isn't a USB 3 problem, it's just a general problem with stuff you plug in to computers.

    The issue was that the power and ground wires were swapped over. Even on USB 2 that only supplies 500mA it would most likely have killed something. And the same goes for every other port on the machine, including HDMI, Thunderbolt, FireWire, PS2 and eSATA+power.

    Any type of cable wired this way is liable to kill something.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    1. Re:Not a USB 3 problem by sexconker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You should never be able to permanently damage a grounded device by connecting something to its ground line. The ground line should be safe for all sane voltages (all bets are obviously off with lightning). On laptops and phones and shit this is a problem because they aren't grounded and have to dump out to the case or something. Even when plugged in, many laptops aren't grounded.

      Modern motherboards advertise physical USB port protection for such bullshit precisely because it's becoming a more common issue with shitty USB devices and cables. It's not a USB 3 problem it's a USB and shitty implementations problem, but that's what happens when you commoditize so hard that all anyone ever does is buy the cheapest item listed that ships with Prime.

    2. Re:Not a USB 3 problem by willy_me · · Score: 2

      Most USB2 hosts include a current limited load switch. When an overcurrent is detected, it turns off the switch and signals the host. This allows the host to display a warning to the user. Just using a PTC resettable fuse does not allow for any user feedback. Also, those PTC fuses are not very accurate and take some time to blow. The load switches are less impacted by changes in the ambient temperature and are much faster to react to an overcurrent event.

    3. Re:Not a USB 3 problem by dfsmith · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's a shame that USB went with Vbus/Gnd rather than V+/V-. The latter would allow the negative side to drift away from ground (which is typically kept on the shield in a zero-current path). They had to devote a small section to voltage drops it in the latest spec (3.6.10.1 in USB_PS_R2_0 V1.1: bottom line is 375mV of Gnd rise and 625mV of Vbus drop).

      The Ethernet guys realized this would be a problem so they made their signals transformer isolated. But USB is designed for short runs and cheap interfaces, not 100m runs across different electrical grids.

      Note, however, that this case was not related to the ground potential at all. Vbus and Gnd were reversed, exceeding the Vgnd_drop limit by over 9V (2400%), or possibly 40V (>10000%) if the device had managed to negotiate the new voltage limits before it died.

  6. Re:Essentially a dupe from 3 months ago by ArtForz · · Score: 5, Informative

    The missing wires weren't the really bad part - the result of that would've "merely" been that it wouldn't work as a USB3 SuperSpeed cable and only connect in USB2 High Speed mode.
    What really set that one apart was that it had VCC and GND swapped on one end.

  7. Inexpensive reliable testers by John+Allsup · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We need inexpensive reliable testers for usb cables. Basically a box where you plug the cables in and it does the various electrical tests.

    --
    John_Chalisque
    1. Re:Inexpensive reliable testers by SeaFox · · Score: 4, Insightful

      We need inexpensive reliable testers for usb cables. Basically a box where you plug the cables in and it does the various electrical tests.

      Isn't the whole point of standard that the consumer should know that two devices are equitable in abilities?
      The problem here is the owner of the USB 3.0 spec is not releasing their legal hounds on companies manufacturing "USB 3.0" cables that don't truly support the standard.

  8. Re:This is why you buy Apple by SeaFox · · Score: 2

    They just design things right from the beginning - don't buy cheap - don't drive Honda!

    What is that, Some sort of joke? Hondas have a reputation of being more dependable (and more expensive) than their domestic counterparts.

  9. Re:Apple by x0ra · · Score: 3, Informative

    what was your point, exactly ? https://www.choice.com.au/elec...

  10. The Cost of Quality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    A quick analysis of the workbook by TheRealHocusLocus finds that "Approved" cables cost ~60% more than unapproved cables on the average.

    Apprvd Average of Cost
    NO $10.61
    Yes $16.71

    -- Jared

  11. Port Design by albeit+unknown · · Score: 2

    The damage is the fault of the port design, not the cable. The port should be able to handle short circuits, switched wires, and incorrect power control signals without permanent damage. What if the perfectly approved Apple cable has been chafed and is now shorted to ground? Fail gracefully.

  12. What's the difference between USA and USB? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    One connects to all of your devices and accesses the data, the other is a hardware standard.

  13. Re:But all cables are the SAME! by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 2

    Please don't let any of us stop you from shelling out for oxygen-free, directional, sub-molecularly-orientated USB cables.

  14. Re:Essentially a dupe from 3 months ago by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 2

    The surprising thing in all of this is a lack of regulation.

    Surely there ought to be a body like the FCC that issues a certification for electrical components sold by a major American online retailer like Amazon before these things even get listed.

  15. Re:Essentially a dupe from 3 months ago by Mike610544 · · Score: 4, Informative

    There is an organization that certifies USB stuff. If a cable has a little sticker with that certification logo, it's probably good.

    Not sure how much they do to prevent unauthorized use though.

    --
    ... also, I can kill you with my brain.
  16. Re:This is why you buy Apple by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 2

    Hondas have a reputation of being more dependable (and more expensive) than their domestic counterparts.

    Yeah, 20 years ago. Now, not so much.

    Neither of the two most recent Hondas I've owned lasted nearly as long as they should have. I no longer buy them.

    --
    You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
  17. Re:Essentially a dupe from 3 months ago by phantomfive · · Score: 2
    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  18. Re:This is why you buy Apple by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

    Hondas have a reputation of being more dependable (and more expensive) than their domestic counterparts.

    Honda is "domestic" by most criteria. Most Honda cars sold in America, are manufactured in America, from American parts, using American labor. Also, much of their stock is owned by Americans, so the profits as well as the wages stay in America.

  19. Re:But all cables are the SAME! by KGIII · · Score: 2

    I think the assumption is that you're either paying the least or the most expensive. To be honest, the least is sometimes acceptable but I can never justify the most expensive - even if I've got the money. I've found that mid-range pricing is often indicative of good value and reliability.

    The above is not limited to cables. It works for cars, shoes, clothing, shop equipment, and most everything else. At least it does in my experience. Very seldom is the least expensive or most expensive choice the best option. I don't buy the best computer or computer parts. I don't buy the cheapest computer parts. I don't buy the most expensive automobile nor do I buy the cheapest - normally. I did deck out my current new car but that was splurging and I wanted the features. It was expensive but it's not the most expensive.

    The law of diminishing returns rears its ugly head again. As does a human need to make things far more complicated than they need to be and the crazy desire to believe in extremes. I am not a headshrinker, I do not know why it is we humans do that but a whole lot of us seem to. I'm sometimes a bit surprised that we wandered down out of the trees.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."