Slashdot Mirror
Free Software Will Help Detect Faulty and Malicious USB-C Cables
Reader Mickeycaskill writes: The USB 3.0 Promoter Group, of which HP, Intel and Microsoft are members, has developed authentication protocols for USB-C and will offer free software to detect faulty or malicious cables.This tool will alert users if they are using a non-authenticated cable. It has been suggested that hardware manufacturers could ship devices with an authentication system already installed. It is hoped that the specification will help end a number of recent incidents where sub-standard cables have either ripped off buyers or damaged devices. Most recently, Amazon said it would be adding USB-C cables and adapters that do not comply with standard regulations to its list of prohibited electronics items.
Apple can use this to lock in
$20-$30 cables
$30-$50 USB3 TB / MINIDP to DVI / VGA / HDMI.
$20 USB3c to USB.
$30 USB3 to GIG-E.
People get tired of USB being affordable and pine for a more Firewire-type system?
Why are we hoping for authenticated cables?
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
when you cables need to be "authenticated"....
Honestly, Everyone bitches about Apple, but the rest of the world is doing the same fucking thing, my cable should not have to authenticate to anything. and should just contain plastic, metal connector pins and copper wires to take it to the other end.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
USB has become succesful because it was cheap and simple to use and cheap and simple to manufacture. It seems to me that USB-C is getting further and further away from that by the day. Maybe different use cases require different solutions, maybe there is no such thing as a 'one universal cable' that can combine the advantages of all the others without the disadvantages. It seems like USB just wanted to replace lightning on Apple stuff, and does not care about PC users who don't have a fortune to waste on a piece of wire. Which is not even just wire anymore, it contains its own electronics, losing all the elegance and simplicity tha made USB great.
No. No, no, no!
The *LAST* thing we need is a USB cable with active components in it. It's almost bad enough that some charging cables have a small resistor in them, because now there are a million different standards of them.
Also, if the ground and power wires are swapped at one end like the cable that killed the chromebook of that google employee, then no software is going to help at all. As soon as you plug it in, it will already have damaged your hardware.
Here is what we *DO* need: USB cables that are transparent so you can SEE the colors of wire going to the pins of each connector. *THIS* is what will prevent damage due to bad cables. Your "software" is not needed, and wouldn't help anyway.
There have been bad cables out there that put in the wrong spec resistor or are otherwise mis-wired. However, I don't agree that "authenticating" the cables is the answer. The word "authentication" implies that there will be key exchanges involved, which puts all the pieces into place for vendor lock-in (i.e. LG devices only charge with LG certified cables, etc... ), not to mention additional cost and complexity. I for one already have a selection of USB-C compliant chargers and cables (yes, using Benson's spreadsheet). Will those be accepted by new USB-C devices supporting this specification? Will there be a supply of cheap USB-C cables that support this "authentication" AND work with every device vendor? I doubt it on both accounts. I prefer Benson's approach of shaming the vendors that don't follow the spec.
You're factually wrong on so many counts that it's not even funny.
A) The cables you're comparing are different lengths. 1m for the "Apple" cable vs. 2m for the Amazon cable. No wonder it's cheaper.
B) That "Apple" cable is being sold by a third-party via Amazon. Apple doesn't sell a single one of their products directly via Amazon. Buyer beware.
C) To compare apples to Apples, an actual 2m Apple cables costs $29 ($19 for 1m), not the $7.50 you suggested it was.
D) If you want to whip out your Apple e-peen to see if it's bigger than mine, I'd wager good money I have you beat. Macs have continuously been my primary computers since the late '80s. A Mac Classic, Performa 400, PowerMac G3 300, Titanium PowerBook DVI, HiRes Aluminum PowerBook, 2008 Mac mini, 2011 Mac mini. My wife uses them, my parents use them, my siblings use them, and my wife's siblings and parents do too. Likewise for phones and tablets: iPhone 3G, iPhone 4, iPhone 5s, iPad 2, and iPad Air 2. I could list off Time Capsules, Airport base stations, and other accessories too, if you'd like.
I use Apple products on a daily basis and absolutely love them (we're planning to buy an iPhone SE this weekend, in fact, assuming they're in stock), but there's no (sane) way to deny that actual Apple dongles and cables are far more expensive than their generic counterparts. It's no different than the advice we'd give people about BTO RAM upgrades: do it yourself after buying from a third-party.
So, as someone whose love for Apple likely runs far deeper than yours: stop with the lies and misinformation, since it makes us all look like we have no clue what we're talking about.
I think a part of the problem with USB-C is that it can handle up to 100 watts of power delivery! If your cable is of questionable quality or has issues, messing up 100 watts of power can definitely break things or cause a fire. I think amazon decided to go the safer route instead of destroying equipment or causing fires.
It's not an authentication chip. It is just a chip that reports what the cable can do. If they didn't do it this way you would either have to design every cable to be able to deliver 50W of power and superspeed channel buffers, or you'd have to come up with a different scheme - such as the variable resistor values used before - to indicate what the cable can do. This also gets complicated fast, and is not easily extendable in the future. The active cable protocol is quite simple, and makes the whole system much more useful. Also, if you don't want any of the advanced features (super speed, high power delivery) then the spec supports passive USB-C cables.
until it's authenticated
Until what's authenticated? That it's a cable? I've read the USB press release and a few other articles and there's no indication anywhere as to what this "authentication" is authenticating. If I take an authentic USB 3.0 cable with authentication and authentically send 10,000 authentic volts down it, does it authentically help the authentic owner of the authentically fried device to know that it's been authentically authenticated?
And you are free not to buy their overpriced USB cables. Period.
Right up until the point where they use authentication to prevent it from working. Like Dell with their power adapters. (Oh, you didn't pay the dell power supply tax, so your 19.5V can't be allowed to charge the battery!)
There are good reasons for authentication--it's very hard to find USB cables that are actually up to spec. It has cost these companies probably millions of dollars in development time to hunt down bugs related to USB cables that are below spec.
But the solution isn't authenticated cables--it's having a robust cable testing protocol. Authenticated cables are fine and can be helpful, so long as they don't *disable* non-authenticated cables, but on their own they don't solve the underlying problem.
The issue here is that the USB group is engaging in anti-competitive practices by scaring users who dare to use non-authenticated USB cables. Printer manufacturers have been doing the same with ink cartridges for years, nobody stomped on them, now it's going to happen with USB cables. No doubt others will follow their lead.