Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New Tech Industry Lobbying Group Argues 'Right to Repair' Laws Endanger Consumers (securityledger.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the we-know-what's-best-for-you dept.

chicksdaddy brings this report from Security Ledger: The Security Innovation Center, with backing of powerful tech industry groups, is arguing that letting consumers fix their own devices will empower hackers. The group released a survey last week warning of possible privacy and security risks should consumers have the right to repair their own devices. It counts powerful electronics and software industry organizations like CompTIA, CTIA, TechNet and the Consumer Technology Association as members... In an interview with The Security Ledger, Josh Zecher, the Executive Director of The Security Innovation Center, acknowledged that Security Innovation Center's main purpose is to push back on efforts to pass right to repair laws in the states.

He said the group thinks such measures are dangerous, citing the "power of connected products and devices" and the fact that they are often connected to each other and to the Internet via wireless networks. Zecher said that allowing device owners or independent repair professionals to service smart home devices and connected appliances could expose consumer data to hackers or identity thieves... Asked whether Security Innovation Center was opposed to consumers having the right to repair devices they purchased and owned, Zecher said the group did oppose that right on the grounds of security, privacy and safety... "People say 'It's just my washing machine. Why can't I fix it on my own?' But we saw the Mirai botnet attack last year... Those kinds of products in the wrong hands can be used to do bad things."

80 of 146 comments (clear)

  1. Paging Richard Stallman... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The IT world needs your commentary, Mr. Stallman.

    1. Re:Paging Richard Stallman... by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 2

      The IT world needs your commentary, Mr. Stallman.

      Give him some time. He needs to wait for his cron job to finish. He surfs the internet as follows:

      "I usually fetch web pages from other sites by sending mail to a program (see https://git.savannah.gnu.org/g...) that fetches them, much like wget, and then mails them back to me. Then I look at them using a web browser, unless it is easy to see the text in the HTML page directly. I usually try lynx first, then a graphical browser if the page needs it (using konqueror, which won't fetch from other sites in such a situation)."

  2. AKA Security Through Obscurity by Zamphatta · · Score: 5, Insightful

    & history's shown that isn't a good idea. unfortunately, I'm guessing the not-so-tech-savvy politicians will fall for that argument, especially since they'll get a lot of money to do so.

    1. Re:AKA Security Through Obscurity by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm guessing the not-so-tech-savvy politicians will fall for that argument, especially since they'll get a lot of money to do so.

      I'm guessing that the NSA is afraid that if we are allowed to open up the devices we own, we might find the "friend" that the NSA has planted in there.

      Like and Intel Management Engine, for instance.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    2. Re:AKA Security Through Obscurity by Ironlenny · · Score: 1

      If you open the case, you'll let the hackers in!

      --
      There is a system for subverting the system and you should use that system!
    3. Re:AKA Security Through Obscurity by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      There is some of that, sure, but they actually have a point hidden in the doublespeak.

      For instance, in the case of the touch sensors used by iPhones, they’re uniquely paired with the rest of the hardware via cryptographic keys, ensuring that if a bad actor ever tried to replace the sensor with one that would grant them unfettered access the rest of the iPhone would refuse to play along.

      The problem, however, is that this trade organization is trying to suggest it’s an either-or problem when it isn’t.

      If a user wants to replace their touch sensor without going through Apple, they should be able to do so! The cryptographic keys shouldn’t prevent them from doing so, and Apple, thankfully, has backed off on their previous stance that caused that iPhones using third-party sensors to cease working. That said, if a user chooses to do so outside of Apple and enters their password to confirm that they accept the use of an untrusted part, they also accept the responsibility for vetting that part themselves, which few of them are likely to ever do. As such, they are indeed opening themselves up to a variety of potential security vulnerabilities.

      All of which is to say, if a user is buying from a particular manufacturer, they clearly trust that manufacturer, and I’m fine with a manufacturer taking steps to ensure that trust is well-placed, but if a user wants to take that responsibility on themselves, let ‘em. The two aren’t mutually exclusive.

    4. Re:AKA Security Through Obscurity by rhazz · · Score: 1

      It's not even that, it's just the same fear-mongering that Apple was trying to push when they wanted to criminalize jail-breaking iPhones a number of years ago. Back then it was claimed to be risk to the mobile infrastructure allowed by having users install third-party software on a device connected to the network. All they really wanted was to maintain full control at the expense of the consumer because it's part of their business model. The difference is that today the fear-du-jour for devices is privacy and there are more players in the market.

  3. YEAH! They endanger customers! by Zurkeyon3733 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They are in danger of NOT completely emptying their wallets to the fat-cats and the CEOs "Bonus" programs and Beer Funds.... Gotta fix that!

  4. Let's let the consumers decide by alvinrod · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Let's let the consumers be the judge of what's a danger to themselves. People who try to go around making laws and rules for someone else's good tend to do a spectacularly poor job of it and generally cause just as much harm as good, even in the case where they're well-meaning instead of clearly under some ulterior motives as is the case here.

    If people want to accept some increased risk (which I don't believe exists) by using third party repair services, that's on them. If a company wants to warn their customers about the possibility of danger, that's as far as they should go.

    1. Re:Let's let the consumers decide by careysub · · Score: 5, Informative

      I don't think you are following along with this subject (though mysteriously you are currently rated "Score:4 Insightful").

      It sounds like you think that there is a movement afoot to pass laws to ban people from repairing their own property. That is the opposite of what is happening here. Businesses are trying to take away the ability to repair products through purchase contracts, designing products that can only be repaired by the manufacturer (there are various ways of doing this), and restricting access to spare parts. People are trying to get legislation passed to preserve the ability to repair products, which has up to now been assumed to exist.

      The whole point is that corporations are trying to take away the ability of letting consumers decide.

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    2. Re:Let's let the consumers decide by El+Cubano · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Let's let the consumers be the judge of what's a danger to themselves. People who try to go around making laws and rules for someone else's good tend to do a spectacularly poor job of it and generally cause just as much harm as good, even in the case where they're well-meaning instead of clearly under some ulterior motives as is the case here.

      I totally 100% agree with you. However, I feel it necessary to point out that the logic being used by these industry trade groups boils down to "these are dangerous things which must be kept out of the wrong hands."

      Coincidentally, or not coincidentally depending on how conspiracy-minded you are, that is the same argument used by gun control advocates.

      Now the merits of the position can certainly be argued as to how they pertain to both smart electronics and also firearms. However, I would consider anyone that supports right-to-repair and gun control, or who opposes both, to be engaging in some sort of congnitive dissonance. People can either choose for themselves or they cannot.

    3. Re:Let's let the consumers decide by Kjella · · Score: 1

      The whole point is that corporations are trying to take away the ability of letting consumers decide.

      Well, in the past you were mostly concerned with the quality of the repair and we've had that whole run with third party parts and uncertified labor. Unfortunately with a lot of modern gadgets it's not that it doesn't work, it's that it's also a Trojan horse. Like, whatever the customer wanted fixed is fixed, but it'll also steal all your private data or contain a backdoor to be controlled like a puppet. With digital signing it can empty your bank accounts and do serious damage. It's not just because they want to secure their own monopoly profits that they want to ensure the integrity of the system.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    4. Re:Let's let the consumers decide by burtosis · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Which has up to now been assumed to exist" assumed by who? Because I clearly remember apple trying to claim and also fight in court that jailbreaking is illegal Also that fixing your home button is illegal - they bricked phones over it before the backlash of stupid forced them to recant (FFS just disable the print reader not the phone) Tell this to farmers who can't repair thier own tractors because it's illegal, it goes on and on. We wouldn't need right to repair laws if it was always assumed.

    5. Re:Let's let the consumers decide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Except this is being used by John Deere to make it so only they can repair their tractors.

      So, farmer John's tractor needs an oil change. He could do it for $80 for the oil and a filter, but NO - he has to call John Deere, so they can send a technician to do it for him. Sure, the oil change is only $120 (50% mark up), but the trip charge (farms tend to be isolated places, away from civilization). is another $240. So, yeah, now you're talking about an $80 oil change costing $360. Keep complaining about the cost of groceries.

      And what danger is there of the tractor getting hacked?

    6. Re:Let's let the consumers decide by fido_dogstoyevsky · · Score: 2

      Sounds standard for mission critical systems where hundreds or thousands of lives could be at stake. Don't like
      boenig's exorbitant maintenance fees? Come to Bob's discount 787 repair.

      Provided Bob is licenced (ie they've proved they really understand how to fix stuff properly) - there really isn't a problem.

      --
      It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
    7. Re:Let's let the consumers decide by William+Baric · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You just repeated the nonsensical argument of the industry. I do think the "overrated" mod was appropriate.

      Is it possible that a repair shop would install a Trojan horse on one of their customers' devices? I guess. Is it probable? No. Believe it or not, but not every technician is a criminal who wants to empty your bank account and then flee the country.

      Do you also believe company should forbid people to change their hard drive and to reinstall the OS on their computer because they would end up being "controlled like a puppet?"

    8. Re: Let's let the consumers decide by Puls4r · · Score: 5, Insightful

      By your reasoning , we'd be finding gps trackers installed in our cars so independent repairman can sell or location data. Plumbers would install remote shutoffs so we had to call them back. By your logic, no repair would ever be a safe repair if done by a third party. You are an idiot.

    9. Re:Let's let the consumers decide by clovis · · Score: 2

      If, as these industry leaders say, these products are so dangerous, then liability for errors in their design needs to be written into law.
      And especially for well known bad design errors such as common admin passwords, backdoors, and ports open by default to incoming connections.

      At first I agreed that letting the consumers be the judge of what's a danger. There's no way a consumer can know about the internal design of these products, and it's probably illegal to try to find out anything if the manufacturer chooses not to publish.
      It's not always the purchaser that gets harmed. Buying a device that becomes part of a botnet may cause much more harm to third parties than the purchaser. Who is liable for that harm? Right now, pretty much no one. I can't support making the consumer responsible for making a poor choice of a device that has an obfuscated design and interface.

      They claim these are dangerous products. So, let's take their word for it, and make these dangerous products have lawfully required minimum standards in the same way that cars, airplanes, household electric devices, and plumbing do. And make the manufacturer liable for civil and criminal charges if they fail.

    10. Re:Let's let the consumers decide by omnichad · · Score: 1

      So don't trust any third party repair companies, but totally trust the first party manufacturers because reasons. They are no more trustworthy and they know it.

    11. Re:Let's let the consumers decide by WinstonWolfIT · · Score: 1

      Bought two Surface Books -- 3 year warranties -- with the full knowledge that warranty service means a clean unit is sent back to me. Hello Cloud. The detach feature on one of them borked, and it was seriously painless to restore my account when the replacement arrived. To me, this is far preferable to the hunk of iron that my Thinkpad was -- as much as I loved the TP's keyboard, it was serious shoulder strain. Pretty certain the Macbooks are equally not repairable.

    12. Re:Let's let the consumers decide by CrashNBrn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      However, I feel it necessary to point out that the logic being used by these industry trade groups boils down to

      This is a "Lobbying Group." And much like most such groups,
      1) Claims to represent companies|people that it doesn't,
      2) Chooses a name "Security Innovation Center," that is the polar opposite of it's actual intent,
      3) And like most Lobying Groups exists soley to bring about specialist protectionist legislation that will screw over the most people for the least amount of money.

    13. Re:Let's let the consumers decide by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Neither of these are black and white issues, unless you believe in an absolute right to bear arms or repair stuff. There's always a trade-off, and usually there are multiple options between the 2 extremes. Someone may want the right to repair because the upside (cheaper repairs because of no monopoly, more devices being repaired instead of thrown out) outweighs the downside (a very very very farfetched scenario where a rogue repairman called Harry Tuttle installs an illegal little bypass in your aircon). There's no contradiction in that same person weighing the upside of owning guns for self defense against the fact that with guns we invariably end up with a bunch of dead kids from time to time, and deciding that a ban on guns is better. Or maybe to push for gun control and registration, if that means we can have guns but no dead kids. It's not about whether or not people can choose for themselves or not, but what the potential consequences of their choices are.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    14. Re:Let's let the consumers decide by jvkjvk · · Score: 1

      I don't think you are following along with this subject

      What? Of course he is. *you* appear to be the one not following along.

      It sounds like you think that there is a movement afoot to pass laws to ban people from repairing their own property.

      There is. From TFS: "The Security Innovation Center, with backing of powerful tech industry groups, is arguing that letting consumers fix their own devices will empower hackers. "

      A movement afoot to ban people form repairing their own property.

      That is the opposite of what is happening here.

      O really? From TFS: "The group released a survey last week warning of possible privacy and security risks should consumers have the right to repair their own devices."

      Right there, "risks" should consumers have the right to repair"...

      People are trying to get legislation passed to preserve the ability to repair products

      Possibly, but nowhere in the summary does it say something like that. This is about what YOU say isn't happening.

      The whole point is that corporations are trying to take away the ability of letting consumers decide.

      The whole point of THIS article is that there IS a movement afoot to pass laws to ban people form repairing your own property, which directly contradicts your previous assertion.

      From TFS: "asked whether Security Innovation Center was opposed to consumers having the right to repair devices they purchased and owned, Zecher said the group did oppose that right "

      Kind Regards.

    15. Re:Let's let the consumers decide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Letting consumers be a judge of what's dangerous sounds good in theory, but people are generally not very knowledgable. See, tide pod challenge, stupid tech support questions, etc.

      Look, we had like what? 50 years where people could get their VCR or TV repaired at some third party without problems.
      They could easily have harmed themselves by trying to do so themselves. Mains current is dangerous and a CRT could give you a shock and a if you poke at the high voltage.

      The idea that we shouldn't be allowed to repair or stuff wherever we want is stupid and people arguing for less ability to repair are either stupid or malicious.

    16. Re:Let's let the consumers decide by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      ... I'll just try to silence you ...

      Hyperbole.

      I can see the post, so it's certainly not silenced.

      Value judgement aside, moderation doesn't work the way you apparently think it does.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    17. Re:Let's let the consumers decide by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Um, why the cognitive dissonance? A libertarian could easily oppose gun control and government regulation of what private corporations make, or someone could think guns dangerous enough to warrant regulations and want the ability to repair legislated, dismissing this claimed danger. Those are completely consistent viewpoints.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    18. Re:Let's let the consumers decide by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Do you also believe company should forbid people to change their hard drive and to reinstall the OS on their computer because they would end up being "controlled like a puppet?"

      If you believe all the phone manufacturers and video game console manufacturers*** , then yes!

      *** Actually, just about every consumer electronics company outside of the desktop computer market.

  5. Security, privacy and safety? by quonset · · Score: 4, Insightful

    WTF? These "smart" devices already aren't secure, send your data to someone at a distant location, and don't always work as the manufacturer says they should. And these same people are worried someone might hack them?

    What next? Making computers where the bits and pieces are welded on so one can't upgrade it?

    1. Re:Security, privacy and safety? by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 2

      What next? Making computers where the bits and pieces are welded on so one can't upgrade it?

      Isn't that basically what Apple has been doing for years?

    2. Re:Security, privacy and safety? by Z80a · · Score: 1

      Welding? no of course not.
      They gonna pot the whole thing.

    3. Re:Security, privacy and safety? by technosaurus · · Score: 1

      An ultrasonic weld on a plastic case _would_ make them essentially waterproof... they already got rid of the headphone jack, so it only follows that the rest of the connectors will be replaced with a wireless pseudo-replacement.

    4. Re:Security, privacy and safety? by Z80a · · Score: 1

      There are other reasons to pot all the components, for example, stopping people from repairing your device by turning it into a solid chunk of resin.

  6. Points for chutzpah anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Yeah, I sure would hate it if a hostile party had control of my device and was limiting its use and determining what I could do with it.

    But I really like how their argument boils down to 'We screwed up the security, therefore you should trust us and only us.'

    This is yet another reminder of why the IoT is a stupid idea. If your washing machine is even capable of identity fraud, you're doing something wrong.

    1. Re:Points for chutzpah anyway by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 2

      If your washing machine is even capable of identity fraud, you're doing something wrong.

      My robot has its own Facebook page and plans to hack the next election in the US.

      It is also apparently fluent in Russian, because it chats Russian late at night.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  7. stop putting crap on the internet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "People say 'It's just my washing machine. Why can't I fix it on my own?' But we saw the Mirai botnet attack last year... Those kinds of products in the wrong hands can be used to do bad things."

    Problem number 1 is you stupid fucks decided to put Wifi in a washing machine. I have an older washing machine with a clockwork type timer control mechanism. I had the replace he timer about 6 months ago, took all of 15 minutes to repair. My washing machine doesn't need to be internet connected.

    1. Re:stop putting crap on the internet by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Sadly, I used to work for one of the companies that made the clockwork timers in white goods. The big appliance companies have transitioned away from electromechanical. That's part of the reason I no longer work for that company. Their business dried up.

      Now I am working as a repair tech on stuff that includes John Deere products....

    2. Re:stop putting crap on the internet by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 2

      For what it's worth, quite a few low-end and commercial appliances (e.g. Speed Queen washer/dryers) still have clockwork timers. I'm not sure if they're better than digital. Digital control panels are sealed and have no moving parts -- a well-designed system should last decades and be immune to entry of dirt or liquids.

    3. Re:stop putting crap on the internet by Mashiki · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Well that's because electromechanical devices have a low failure rate. If they can't charge out the ass by forcing the customer to buy an entire new front-end array for half the cost of the washing machine it's really bad for the bottom line.

      Now I am working as a repair tech on stuff that includes John Deere products....

      Bet that's fun, most farmers around here dumped their Deere stuff a few years ago when they decided to be pricks over the farmers ability to control their equipment. You can pick up a 2yr old Deere tractor loaded to the gills for $20k but no-one is buying. On the other side of that, the price for Fendt and Deutz-Fahr have gone up around 30% and there's parts shortages.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    4. Re:stop putting crap on the internet by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 2

      Electromechanical devices (with moving parts) fail more than a properly designed all-electronic control panel. Key phrase: properly designed.

    5. Re:stop putting crap on the internet by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      Depends on the electronics. I'm typing this on a Thinkpad that's 5+ years out of warranty.

    6. Re:stop putting crap on the internet by Mashiki · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Electromechanical devices (with moving parts) fail more than a properly designed all-electronic control panel. Key phrase: properly designed.

      Except for those millions of cases where they don't right? Ask yourself how many times you've heard from someone saying that their brand new electronic whatever has already failed in warranty, but their parents 30 year old whatever is still chugging along and hasn't stopped. Or you have some asshat of a company like Samsung that built their fridges to fail just outside of the warranty phase(all electronic bits fyi). Here's the thing, we're really good at making electromechanical devices that last long, and have low rates of failure. The relays and emr-switches that our company uses have a failure rate of 1:900k over 10 years. They have to handle wet, dry, humid, extreme heat/cold and keep going day in and day out.

      I'll agree that some stuff has a higher failure rate, cars for example with non-electronic ignition had multiple points of failure and were prone for the simplest no-start problems mostly relating to the rotor. On the other side, for every $1k central console in car that fails and takes out the: radio, navigation, heater, signals, and so on. That 20 year old clunker next to you with all mechanical relays, wires, and switches is still going strong.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    7. Re:stop putting crap on the internet by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      They do break. I had one break on my 14 year old machine when the motor overloaded due to worn out shocks. A common occurrence apparently. The repair guy quoted around €400 for a replacement logic board... Thankfully, these older board aren't sealed and are pretty old school: a little Googling and replacing €4 worth of parts and it was back in business (after replacing the shocks as well). Which is great, these older Miele brand machines are not 100% maintenance free and not without faults either, but they are mechanically indestructible (this was the first time it failed, and the first time it needed repair). They certainly don't make 'em they used to!

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    8. Re:stop putting crap on the internet by inode_buddha · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. My ma's old Kenmore dryer lasted 30 yrs with only *one* service call -- for a worn-out belt that I could have changed myself. The electromechanical controls were still working just fine when she scrapped it in 2001. This is with normal use every other day for a household of five.

      --
      C|N>K
    9. Re:stop putting crap on the internet by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      Laundry equipment is my favorite example of an expensive model being worse than the cheap base models. When I bought my set of laundry machines I got the $500 pair frankly because that was what I could afford. Right around the same time my Parents moved to a new house and my Father decided to splurge on a new $1000 washing machine. Within a few years the safety shutoff switch on the door of his washer failed because it had rusted apart. Then a couple years later the computerized controls failed and had to be replaced. They've spent something like $500 on just parts fixing a $1000 washing machine over the last 10 years. Mean while my set has had a water pump and air heating element fail, both of which cost about $50. When the water pump failed my wife actually patched it up with a hot glue gun so she could use it while we waited for the new pump to ship. And the dryer could still be used to tumble dry things in a pinch.

      I have heard talk that the more expensive machines are much more energy and water efficient. Where I live though that isn't really much of a concern, power is relatively cheap and water is a few dollars per thousand gallons.

    10. Re:stop putting crap on the internet by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Haw many times do you think my parents replaced various parts in that 30 year old whatever?

      Generally? Once. I'll give you an example, the fridge my parents have was made in 1973, it's now 2018. They've had to replace the thermostat in it once, that was back in 1994 or so. That's it.

      You think the temperature sensor, timers, alternators, etc. in those things just last forever?

      Generally? Those things do last forever. The average failure time on an alternator is around 12 years. Various engine sensors are built to last around 8-10 years. Doesn't mean there can be issues, for ones that have "rotational components" built into them like TPS and so on, or do duty in an extreme-heat environment like the O2 sensor(these are the most common failures) because hot/cold cycling can cause the ceramic casing to break and that ruins the sensor.

      Technically they could be better, but they aren't. Companies are designing components to have a particular lifetime, and the rare cases where this isn't true is when it's devices that keep people safe. Even then, with the swath of chinese knockoffs, and chinesium metals there's supplyside failures because of it.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
  8. But the source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    A group representing electronics manufacturers, who stand to gain financially by controlling access to their devices, argues that granting consumers access to a device they bought is "dangerous" to them and to everyone. Right. Don't for a second believe these folks have anyone's interests at heart but their own - the laws of corporation actually strongly discourage executive officers from arguing otherwise.

  9. Oh, the horror! by sandbagger · · Score: 1

    "He said the group thinks such measures are dangerous, citing the "power of connected products and devices" and the fact that they are often connected to each other and to the Internet via wireless networks."

    Translation: most dhttps://it.slashdot.org/story/18/02/24/1939255/new-tech-industry-lobbying-group-argues-right-to-repair-laws-endanger-consumers#evices are routers.

    Oh, the horror if people find that out!

    --
    ---- The above post was generated by the Turing Institute. Maybe.
  10. Repair parts as dangerous as guns? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This is all just absurd. The right to repair does not empower hackers. The availability of repair parts doesn't threaten people's safety. Guns can be used to threaten someone but there is no chance of us restricting them but repair parts now they are just criminal you might save a few dollars by repairing rather than replacing saving your family from financial ruin and heck even prevent greater tragedy. But let's criminalize repairing your own device violating the doctrine of first sale while putting more guns into tense situations because that will solve everything. In this absurd world maybe starving lions will lie down with sheep rather than you know doing the logical thing and eating them.

  11. Annoys me that the used the word "security" by raymorris · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It bugs me that they called themselves the "Security Innovation Center". Those of us in security have consistently advocated for the need to be able to work on devices in order to secure them. Most recently the Obama administration tried to push through regulations requiring manufacturers to "prevent the installation of OpenWRT and similar third-party firmware" on routers. We successfully argued that preventing firmware upgrades often prevents security fixes.

    These jack asses do NOT represent security anything.

    1. Re:Annoys me that the used the word "security" by burtosis · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Just run it through the BS inverter:
      Security Innovation Center" - Illegal Corporate Lock In Center
      "Right to work" - Divide and Conquer
      "Patriot Act" - Unconstitutional Removal of Privacy Act
      etc...

  12. Leave barn door open, blame cows for results by rgriff59 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So the very tech industry actors that created the stage for the Mirai botnet think letting consumer take any control of those same actors' faulty devices will create significant new dangers? I think allowing those manufacturers any more unsupervised commercial activity is far more dangerous.

  13. Re:Covered by 2nd Amendment by Smallpond · · Score: 1

    Anything that can be used against government tyranny, such as guns and computers, are considered "arms" and therefore protected by the 2nd Amendment in the U.S. We have a right to bear and maintain these devices.

    No. Firmware on your musket prevents you from loading anything but original brand mini-balls.

  14. Re:WTF! by postbigbang · · Score: 1

    And so they're trying to fool with bovine genetics to get the farts out of the gene pool. No, really.

    Fool with cow genetics, try to fix your washing machine. Which one is worse? We have a schematic for the freaking cow, but we can't get one for the washing machine.

    That's a problem.

    --
    ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
  15. What they are really afraid of by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

    They don't want customers fixing any of the "SMART" malware they purchased to no longer endanger their privacy, security, artificially limit capabilities or restrict choice.

    Lost malware = lost revenue

  16. Okay by c · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you're arguing that consumers shouldn't be able to fix stuff "because security", then we presume that you're promising the stuff you sell actually is secure and that you're willing to accept 100% liability when things get hacked?

    * crickets *

    Well then, fuck you too.

    --
    Log in or piss off.
    1. Re:Okay by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Their tact is that since their product will be 'locked down' we will not have the ability to even determine if the security is at fault. They want black boxes everywhere that absolve them of blame.

    2. Re:Okay by burtosis · · Score: 1

      I call BS on the grounds all data has already been stolen. When we won't even hold equifax responsible for collecting data on all Americans, most of which is against thier will and or knowledge, they can simply get fucked.

  17. Missing from the tool's quote by Rick+Zeman · · Score: 1

    "Zecher said that allowing device owners or independent repair professionals to service smart home devices and connected appliances could expose consumer data to hackers or identity thieves."

    "That's our job."

  18. Then why do they churn out abandonhardware? by anon+mouse-cow-aard · · Score: 2

    I have never walked into a house that had a router less than five years old. I keep mine for 10 years at least, it's a natural lifetime. Do any manufacturers provide software updates for hardware > 2 years old? no. I have two google nexus 5 phones, no software support at all I'm sure appliance companies said, sorry your washer is two years old, we don't stock those parts, they wouldn't stay in business very long. I don't understand making objects smart suddenly makes their useful lives shorter than a gerbil's.

    1. Re:Then why do they churn out abandonhardware? by mnemotronic · · Score: 1

      Not everything needs to be computer controlled.

      Absolutely. My new computer controlled, energy & water conserving, "kind to clothes" machine sucks in ways you can't even imagine.

      --
      The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
    2. Re:Then why do they churn out abandonhardware? by umafuckit · · Score: 1

      I don't understand making objects smart suddenly makes their useful lives shorter than a gerbil's.

      Because it makes it makes planned obsolescence easier. People are often willing to buy again every few years in order to get something incrementally better. Also, the appliances in question are often small and easy to get rid of.

      --
      soylentnews.org
  19. Easy Fix by pubwvj · · Score: 1

    There is an easy fix to the "Tech Group's" fallacious "survey" concerns about devices connected to the internet: just don't buy devices connected to the internet that don't need connecting to the internet. My fridge, my stove, my vacuum, my washer, my drier, my water heater, my breaker box, my...

    Besides, those are not really what the issue is about. The issue stems from third parties, including users, not being able to repair their cars, trucks and tractors. I certainly do NOT need my tractors connected to the internet. Besides, there is no service here on our farm that the tractor would connect to - no cell, no wide area WiFi, etc. John Deere and other makers are sucking the life out of us by over pricing repairs and they're locking us in by banning us from repairing our own equipment.

  20. What they don't want ... by PPH · · Score: 1

    ... is for consumers to 'repair' their devices by disabling the phone home features. Or in the case of IoT devices with a legitimate need to be connected; to redirect the connection to a competing service or home server. So the vendor won't be able to monetize the collected data.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  21. What a load by sjames · · Score: 1

    That has to be the worst excuse I have ever heard. I sincerely hope someone superglues their ass cheeks together in their sleep so they will stop spewing so much shit.

  22. I find it interesting, by jenningsthecat · · Score: 1

    that many of the people who are pushing back against right-to-repair legislation and sentiments, are the same ones who are pushing STEM education and mandatory comp sci courses in high school. Do they really think that having greater numbers of technically skilled citizens won't result in a much bigger, more knowledgeable, and more effective push for right-to-repair? I rather think the swelling ranks of the tech savvy will insist on using their hard-won skills on their own behalf to repair, manage, and control the devices and machines they depend on.

    It's hard to tell if Big Tech simply hasn't spotted this contradiction, or if they're in damage control mode. Or maybe they're confident that the social engineering and propaganda mechanisms they've put in place are up to the challenge of controlling their future wage slaves' self-interested impulses.

    --
    'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
  23. Online Petitions? Counter arguments? by rnturn · · Score: 1

    How do people who are not shilling for major corporations with nothing but a profit motive band together to address silly-assed arguments like this?

    Are there groups that won't be merely waved off as a bunch of insignificant cranks because they don't have lobbyists?

    EFF? Are they chiming in on this?

    --
    CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
  24. I call that by oldgraybeard · · Score: 1

    what the bull leaves out in the pasture! I will dissect anything I purchase if I decide to! If I can not I do not want it in my life.

    Just my 2 cents ;)

  25. The Rise of the Industry Tool... by Grog6 · · Score: 1

    Hire someone to say Fucking Anything remotely coherent, put it on facebook, and people think it's the motherfucking Gospel.

    As long as there's a way to program the original device, someone will eventually hack it.

    --
    Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
  26. They should be held responsible for security by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 2
    Now that the industry has admitted how dangerous these products could be, they should be held 100% responsible for securing them. Any breach, especially on a locked down device that the consumer did not or could not mess with, would be their liability.

    Since the devices might outlive the companies that sold them, all such devices must carry insurance, premium paid by the manufacturer, to make good on any damage they might cause.

    Only when there is an actual cost that affects their bottom line these guys will take security seriously. Forcing them to buy liability insurance will make some one look at the devices and assess the security.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  27. Those evil washing machines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Wel I for one was unaware the Mirai botnet was caused by consumers repairing their washing machines, we live and learn..........

  28. How about by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1
    Some enterprising manufacturer make say, a completely user repairable smartphone, and let the market decide.

    I can repair a present day smartphone as long as I can get the parts for it.

    But that's another thing. How long does the right to repair enforce availability of all of the parts in that smartphone. 10 years? 25? forever?

    Modular or component level repair?

    What level of acumen is the baseline user? Someone like me, who has operated on chips themselves, or Grandma who has never dissasembled anything?

    then there are power issues. Short out or damage that LiPo? scary stuff.

    Then we get ot the upgradeability. Will this phone be required to have upgrades for lifetime?

    I'm basically seeing this repairable phone as something huge and thick, and very expensive as a stockpile of every part or module is needed and the space requirements for making it possible to change the parts is added.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    1. Re:How about by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1
      Let's remove the Apple stuff, just so we can avoid the cherry picking that often happens here from some of the people who hate all things Apple.

      Let's take an example of a small computing device like the Raspberry Pi. Let's also assume it meets that 50 dollar limit. So in making it repairable by the consumer, the manufacturer would need to make certain that a stockpile of parts were on hand. This is a problem that manufacturers have today with device design. There are some venerable semiconducter components that are still produced years after their initial release - like the 555 timer chips and the amazingly elderly but still capable 2N3055 Power transistor - but many devices are cancelled abruptly and with little notice.

      Its quite a gamble for the manufacturers. with replacement parts now. Imagine having to stock parts so that grandma can fix her iPhone 4, or old Nokia Feature phone.

      The prices would soar.

      I suspect a lot of this right to repair started with people being pissed that after abusing the crap out of their phones, they couldn't just go to WalMart and buy a replacement battery and pop it in. When the real problem is that they should quit abusing the damn thing.

      My parable of all this is that my son is on my family plan, and he came in with the wife and I to trade up We all had iPhone 5's. Mine was pristine, and battery still held a like new charge. Hers looked very good, but she didn't take as good care of the battery, so it was a little soft. His looked like what I'd seen so many other young peoples phones. Cracked bezel, scratched case, battery not so hot.from many discharge to shutoffs and charging with dodgy power sources. So another case of what level of use and abuse should the mfgrs be held to?

      Re water damage. I won't look at them any more. A friend wanted her's repaired after the cat peed in it. After disassembly and queasy work of cleaning it, I simply coudn't get it working again. So I managed to buy another one of the same model, re-install The OS and Programs and files form a time machine backup, and get her back in business. She promptly spilled soda on her new laptop.

      So I consider water damage as total destruction now.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  29. Fear mongering by emaname · · Score: 1

    It's what politicians and lobbyists do. Unfortunately our society is very susceptible to it. Maybe better education can make our country less susceptible to it. But with the way present-day politicians are slashing educational budgets, it doesn't look encouraging.

    --
    An effective "democracy" creates the illusion the people have a say in their government.
  30. Slanted poll? by mnemotronic · · Score: 1

    ... according to the organization’s survey of 1,015 Americans ... 84 percent told survey takers that they value the security of their data over convenience or speed of service.

    So if they had asked me: What do you value most:

    • A: Data security
    • B: Convenience
    • C: Speed of service
      • I would probably have answered "A". The inappropriately named "Security Innovation Center" seems to be saying this means consumers don't want the right to repair. If they said "speed of service", in that context I would have been thinking "network throughput" when what they meant was "time to repair". Use of ambiguous or duplicitous language in a poll is unforgivable.

        In any case, I'm not trying to fix or repair my device; I'm attempting to break it. The equivalent of driving over it with the tractor. I'm allowed to do that. Of course I'm a terrible hack. I may not be entirely successful in my attempts to disable or destroy the device's firmware. Gosh darnit.
    --
    The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
  31. When did the The Security Innovation Center... by magusxxx · · Score: 1

    ...speak out against Best Buy?

    "Zecher said that allowing device owners or independent repair professionals to service smart home devices and connected appliances could expose consumer data to hackers or identity thieves"

    How is it any different than Best Buy dumping people's computer and phone contents onto their own systems?

    Why didn't they go to Congress and yell, "They can't be trusted to repair stuff anymore!"

    --
    Care killed the cat, but satisfaction brought it back.
  32. You're automatically guilty until proven... by MindPrison · · Score: 1

    ...innocent kind of belief they're going with there. Always the same boring, and mindbogglingly stupid argument:

    "Those kinds of products in the wrong hands can be used to do bad things."

    It would be the same as accusing the other 99% of actual product owners who just want to modify/optimize/better/repair and fix their own stuff to save a few buck, not to mention saving the entire planet - of being the criminals.

    And if you own a product - YOU OWN IT! What part is there not to understand? Of course you can't demand warranty if you fiddle with it yourself, that is to be understood. But if it's yours then it's truly YOURS to mess with.

    By all means makers - have fun, modify stuff. I'd do that regardless of laws. No law in this world is going to bar me from doing what I want with what I paid for. If there's lawmakers in my country that thinks otherwise, it's about time to ship them out somewhere else.

    --
    What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
  33. Right to Repair? More Like the Right to Phase Out! by X!0mbarg · · Score: 1

    It looks more and more to me like the "Industry" is trying to get things set so that they have all the rights, and final users do not. Mostly, this takes the form of "providing a service" over actual ownership a device.

    If you Own it, you have every right to try and fix it, should it fail, or behave erratically. This allows you to get your monies' worth out of the darned thing, before having to buy a whole new one.

    Should it be designated as a Service, then the service provider has the lions' share of the rights, and can force an upgrade, or phase out all or part of a service that is not as profitable to them whenever thy feel like it (more or less).

    Just look at Microsoft. They would like us to swallow the notion that their O.S. is a Service, and have us pay a subscription fee for its use. They even tried this with M.S. Office. All this in their attempt to curb piracy of their over priced software.

    On the hacker vulnerability: If they want access to a device, they'll hack into it! This will happen if it's legal to do so or not! Probably more-so, if it's been made illegal, as the rush is increased, and the chances of a user finding it through personal efforts to repair their oddly functioning device discovers something awry.

    On a more Corporate focused level: The big companies want us to not see what they are doing in the background. Plain and simple. If we do not have the Right to Repair, we loose the right to investigate the operation of the devices we rely on for our daily functions, and security. If we can't see what's going on, then they can get away with murder! "Oh, your slow device is simply past its operating capacity, and you simply need to get a new one." Apple/iPhones, anyone? How about good old Microsoft XP/7?

    Given this insight, is it any wonder why the Tablet aspect of the industry has not taken off?

    On a personal note: I do Not trust "the Cloud" for anything. My files are stored on my own drives, and kept behind firewalls, routers, and in a reasonably secure network configuration. If hackers want my personal info, they have to hack into my network to get it, not simply invade Facebook when I'm not looking. If they are determined, there's very little I can do to stop them. Kind of like my car. If a thief really wants it, I can't stop them from dragging it onto a flatbed towtruck and hauling it away while I sleep.

    One of the reasons I turn my systems Off at night, or when not in use. It's a LOT more difficult to get hacked when the system is not even powered on!

    Of course, my Windows 10 systems seem to power on all by themselves, from time to time, and it took me a bit of doing to get that to stop...

    I wonder what they were looking for?

    Maybe, I'll never know...

  34. Stop selling knives!!! by frosch · · Score: 1

    We shoud buy our food allready cut, because... "Those kinds of products in the wrong hands can be used to do bad things."
    Really?!

  35. EFF: Defend Your Right to Repair! by tepples · · Score: 1

    EFF? Are they chiming in on this?

    Yes. Electronic Frontier Foundation does in fact have an issue page about right to repair.

  36. Re:Right to Repair? More Like the Right to Phase O by Stan92057 · · Score: 1

    I fixed Windows 10 by never installing it.Everyone was warned way before hand what win 10 was..And everyone missed the warning signals, ms gave it away for FREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE And tricked lazy/trusting people to installing even more copies. Lied to pro buyers and removed functionality they paid for the only people who have the real balls are people like me who just said no. If my PC dies im going Linux but i hate have to do that as linux wont allow me to install any of my software. but going windows 10 would be far worse...My times running out i have a EVGA 790i ultra MB that probable only last a few more years..Video cards are being phased out for 7 not even worth the trouble to upgrade the processor and intel probably stop making that processor as well..haven't checked though.

    --
    Jack of all trades,master of none