Slashdot Mirror


Huawei Will No Longer Allow Bootloader Unlocking On Its Android Handsets (androidauthority.com)

Chinese smartphone maker Huawei has long made it easier for users to unlock the bootloader on its phones. But that is changing now. Android Authority: Earlier this month a support page, which detailed ways to unlock a bootloader, disappeared without any explanation from the company's websites. In a statement, the company said, "In order to deliver the best user experience and prevent users from experiencing possible issues that could arise from ROM flashing, including system failure, stuttering, worsened battery performance, and risk of data being compromised, Huawei will cease providing bootloader unlock codes for devices launched after May 25, 2018." It added, "For devices launched prior to the aforementioned date, the termination of the bootloader code application service will come into effect 60 days after today's announcement. Moving forward, Huawei remains committed to providing quality services and experiences to its customers. Thank you for your continued support."

253 comments

  1. Right to unlock by r_naked · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I am against the government getting involved in most aspects of our lives, but this is flat out a case where government intervention is needed,

    If a phone can't be unlocked so I can install whatever OS I want, then it should not be allowed to be imported into the USA.

    This includes the iPhone...

    If I pay $3000 for a top of the line laptop, I can install whatever OS I want. It may not work perfectly, but that is on me. If I pay $300 for a bottom basement laptop, I can still install whatever OS I want.

    This has GOT to change with phones as well.

    They try to give some bullshit about how it is to protect the network, but that is a load of horseshit.

    --
    -- http://anonet.org -- The internet the way it was meant to be. Check it out, you may be surprised.
    1. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Buy a phone that you can unlock instead?

    2. Re:Right to unlock by FalcDot · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sorry, but this is in no way, shape or form a 'right'. Governments should not get involved in this. Vote with your wallet. If people want phones whose bootloader they can unlock, they should stop buying Huawei phones immediately.

    3. Re:Right to unlock by BlueStrat · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If I pay $3000 for a top of the line laptop, I can install whatever OS I want.

      Only for the present, but that too shall change. The Political-Industrial Complex will push to have ALL devices locked into officially-sanctioned bootloaders and OS's soon. Lost profits and lost opportunities to snoop due to a non-homogeneous software/OS/encryption/security environment making spying and mass data-collection difficult will not be tolerated.

      It's coming unless there is serious pushback.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    4. Re:Right to unlock by fred6666 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      We've seen it with SIM-locking. Voting with your wallet doesn't work in an oligopoly case. There are very few carriers and they all lock their phones. Fortunately, in many countries, the government stepped in and banned SIM locking. Nothing of value was lost and it is better for the consumer and increased competition.

    5. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you worry, UEFI's Secure Boot is already fucking around Linux installations.

    6. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You idiots have been claiming this for more than a decade and it has never come true.

    7. Re:Right to unlock by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      Aaah but can you? Many devices make you jump through all sorts of hoops to do just that. The top of the line Chromebooks made you jump through hoops, the bottom of the line Surface RT had secure boot locked down completely

      You're going to see it change in the wrong way you expect before you see it change in the right way.

    8. Re: Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My toaster has a small computer in it but I canâ(TM)t install Linux on it. So does my smart TV, my car and a few other things.

      Letâ(TM)s ban all toasters and televisions that donâ(TM)t allow Linux installs.

      No, duh, dummy, they made it quite clear they are getting a zillion support calls from morons who followed directions they found on some stupid blog and bricked their phones so now they want a new one. Theyâ(TM)ll brick that one too and keep trying.

      We could have nice things if a tiny loud minority werenâ(TM)t so fucking stupid.

      Itâ(TM)s their product and they can choose how they sell it. Now stfu and go bake me a cake that says, âoelocked phones are good!â. You have no choice because the government said you have to.

      Dumb ass.

    9. Re: Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They lock them in your country. In Chile they have to be unlocked for any local carrier. They still lock them for international ones to get the roaming $$$, but for a small fee (I think it is about us$20) they fully unlock them after you finish paying them (if you have it tied to a plan).
      So yes, you need better regulation.

    10. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except when in the real world oligopolies work as an effective cartel and your only wallet option is to vote for Kodos.

    11. Re:Right to unlock by infolation · · Score: 1

      The opportunity to install a custom OS does not equate to full control over the the software and firmware running on a laptop. For example, since about 2008, ring -3 has been entirely inaccessible on Intel chipset laptops.

    12. Re:Right to unlock by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      Can you offer a reason this must be the case, other than "because"?

    13. Re:Right to unlock by houghi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Voting with your wallet only works if there are alternatives and if it would actually change anything.

      e.g. if there is a big, huge outcry because a company does something that the general public does not want (e.g. child labour, appartheid, ...) then it might work and change policies. If you, as an individual do it, they do not care.

      So what if they do not have a few thousand customers that are not buying their stuff. There are enough who do. The other companiessee this and do the same.

      The fact that I do NOT want to change the bootloader does not mean I do not want the right to do so.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    14. Re:Right to unlock by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      You need the correct cultural context, of course. China is run by the Communist party. Open Source is Communist, and therefore good for the people. By opposing Open Source, These are opposing the good of the people. Never fear, with some reeducation, Huawei can become again valuable and worthy members of society.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    15. Re: Right to unlock by Comboman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sim locking forces a user to stay on their network on and is anti competitive. There is nothing magical about their network.

      There is nothing magical about their OS build either, other than that it is bundled with crap-ware and may never get a security update. Also, if having one company control your data service, hardware AND software isn't anti-competitive, I don't know what is. Monopolies can be vertical as well as horizontal.

      --
      Support Right To Repair Legislation.
    16. Re:Right to unlock by Nkwe · · Score: 1

      I think the broader question is if you should be able to install the software you want on any computing device. I don't think the answer to this is clear. Think of a car (typical slashdot analogy) - Should you be able to change the software to bypass emissions systems? how about safety systems? Do we really want it easy for people to load [formally] untested software on the drive by wire breaking and steering systems we have now and in fully autonomous cars that we will have in the future? What about medical devices? Should people be able to load their own software on pacemakers and insulin pumps? In some ways these are strawman questions, in other ways they are not. Messing with the firmware on a phone can impact the ability to call 911 (or whatever the emergency number is where you live). Messing with the firmware on a phone can impact how the internal radio works, messing with how the phone uses radio frequencies and protocols that could interfere with other's ability to place calls and and transmit data. Messing with the firmware can change the behavior of battery charging systems creating fire risk. In an idea world, the functions of a phone that are network and human safety related would be regulated and locked down while the "application" related parts would be available to mess with. In the real world it is hard to find where this line is and it technically challenging (expensive) to implement software separation of critical safety vs non safety features.

    17. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      You idiots have been claiming this for more than a decade and it has never come true.

      It's been true since a couple years ago now.

      All OEM laptops will only boot an OS that has its boot loader digitally signed by Microsoft to be allowed to boot. It's a requirement to have their "Windows 10" certification sticker, and an OEM Win10 installation on them.

      The reason you mistakenly might believe this isn't the case (other than being a troll that does know better) is because RedHat pays Microsoft their yearly stipend to have their Grub loader be signed by Microsoft to be allowed.

      But many Linux distros, and many other OSes, can't or don't wish to pay for this, and no longer boot on newer x86_64 and amd64 based computers.

    18. Re:Right to unlock by supernova87a · · Score: 1

      This pretty much embodies how vocal and yet myopic someone can be when their particular issue displeases them. Time to open a constitutional court case! Time for regulation! In this issue which I care about, but nothing else that's important! It's amazing the specialization of outrage today, huh?

      Did you ever see the Steve Jobs talk where a guy in the audience starts to trash him about the Mac not supporting x,y,z (I don't recall exact technology in question)?

      For that one person, this might be the biggest thing in the world. But for the phone maker, it probably is not only about securing their hardware from tampering, and preventing network "experimentation", but also that if anything goes wrong with their phones (malware, hacking) they are the ones to get blamed.

      So, who is the manufacturer to listen to? The bulk of the users who don't speak up except when something goes wrong because they tried fiddling with the bootloader and messed up? Or the few users who want it? (and at that, don't really *need* it, but like having it for a personal hobby reason)

      Hm?

    19. Re:Right to unlock by sinij · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sorry, but this is in no way, shape or form a 'right'.

      It is "right to repair". I can repair or replace OS with a third-party offering and is not locked-in to OEM provided options.

    20. Re: Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      A car is not a phone. Please don't conflate the two. A phone is also not a nuclear sub. Pretending to look at the broader picture is confusing you, so don't do it. The answer to the rest of your questions is yes, you should be able to tamper with the phone. You can't tamper with someone else's phone for the reasons you give, but that is, again, conflating self with other. Please stop that.

    21. Re:Right to unlock by supernova87a · · Score: 1

      But this is not the same question.

      In the SIM case, consumers had a common and reasonable belief that they should be able to switch carriers pending the end of their contracts, and their phones were clearly capable of doing so.

      In the case of operating systems, for example, or let's take iOS on Apple iPhones, there is not really the expectation of being able to put Android on it.

      Phones don't generally switch operating systems, and consumers don't have a reasonable expectation to do so. And, for that matter, the number of people calling for this is pretty much 0.

      This is not a place to codify such a tiny, miniscule issue. And it is not an issue that falls in the realm of anti-competitive or customer expectations calling for such regulations.

    22. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The government already is involved. The radios on the phones are devices programmed by the "modem" driver of the OS.

      The "modem" driver is OS specific and there are government regulatory restrictions on opening up the documentation due to illegal settings that could be accessed.

    23. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, but this is in no way, shape or form a 'right'.

      This is correct.

      The key to dealing with situations like this, is to look at what special privileges that the phone maker doesn't have a right to do, but which they're doing with special permission. Then society should demand terms for those privileges.

      In this instance, it's a radio transmitter and would normally be illegal without jumping through some hoops. Simply don't allow the phone to be sold with any means of interfacing with cell networks. If the phone maker wants to make an ethernet-only phone, they don't need any special privileges and also don't need to do anything in the service of society, so they can pre-install whatever malware they want to. (Unless they're doing something else that they don't have a right to.)

      But if they want it to be able to transmit on any licensed spectrum (e.g. cell networks) over public-owned airwaves -- then consessions should be demanded in exchange for the special privilege. So that's where you add the requirement that it's prohibited for it to come with any pre-installed malware (and locked bootloaders (assuming the key is withheld from the owner) are, of course, a type of malware since the whole point is to make the device serve the manufacturer's interest instead of the owners, if there's a conflict such as the owner wanting to change the software).

    24. Re:Right to unlock by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      but this is flat out a case where government intervention is needed,

      You have the right not to buy it. I'd prefer not creating imaginary rights.

      There are phones that are positioned as being open source and mod friendly. They aren't the cheapest phones, but they aren't unreasonably expensive. Samsung Z2, Librem 5 (I think it hasn't shipped yet, but it is close), and a few older ones as well.

      For most people the hardware and OS are not separate components that can be slotted in and out to suit the user's preferences, but instead is a monolithic user experience. That's really what Apple sells and you'd have a hard time showing the harm in the iPhone model.

      I'd be more open to standardizing the charging port on phones instead. Maybe we'd throw fewer chargers in landfills.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    25. Re: Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lick those boots!

    26. Re: Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No. Most bricking comes from trying to get around the lockout in the first place. Remove the lockout and the bricking won't happen.

    27. Re:Right to unlock by fred6666 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      on Apple iPhones, there is not really the expectation of being able to put Android on it.

      Why not? If I want to try? Or develop my own OS?
      How is it any different whether it's a pocket-sized computer (aka phone) or a full computer (laptop/desktop)?
      By your logic, there no expectation to wipe Mac OS and install Linux or BSD on an Apple laptop either.

    28. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Vote with your dollars, in the only market where your vote counts... Assassination Politics.

    29. Re: Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you don't want government to get involved unless it's something you want (but don't need) then they should. I suppose you feel the same about what other people want but dont need, like needing to eat, being educated, freedom from persecution, or any other such stupid pointless thing that would be far less important than having a phone with an unlocked bootloader?

      I have dream that one day all men and women will have the right to a phone with an unlocked bootloader!

    30. Re:Right to unlock by zilym · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is not a tiny, miniscule issue. People have more smart phones than they have cars. This massive fleet of mobile computing devices is going to have security issues that get exploited sooner or later and the handset manufactures aren't going to do jack to close the holes. They want old phones to become trash and force everyone to buy new phones whenever they decide it's time to make some revenue. If this behavior is not monopolistic, anti-competitive, and counter to the public's best interests, then WTF is?

      A bootloader locked phone is like a car with the hood welded shut. Most people don't know or care about what's under the hood until it breaks. And once it does, they have a reasonable expectation of being able to take it to the nearest repair guy to get it working again.

    31. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The reason you mistakenly might believe this isn't the case (other than being a troll that does know better) is because RedHat pays Microsoft their yearly stipend to have their Grub loader be signed by Microsoft to be allowed.

      But many Linux distros, and many other OSes, can't or don't wish to pay for this, and no longer boot on newer x86_64 and amd64 based computers.

      Will RedHat's grub refuse to load a debian system? If that's true, that's really gross and probably a gpl3 violation.

    32. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am against the government getting involved in most aspects of our lives, but this is flat out a case where government intervention is needed,....

      Errr, it was US government intervention that led to this announcement.

    33. Re:Right to unlock by wierd_w · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Given that the heart of android is FOSS, if sufficient information about the hardware is known, then it seems perfectly reasonable for an android port to that hardware to exist, barring some really strange hardware related situations that would make that more trouble than it is worth. (say, the custom ARM CPU is missing some really important instructions or features.)

      See also-- AOSP, and derivatives, like LineageOS.

      The real reason is that the hardware makers dont want people poking about with unfettered OS level control over their chips and radios, because a lot of those are fully software controlled, and with a modified binary blob, features that they charge extra for can be turned on easily.

      They cuddle up to the FCC, and complain that these experimenters and hackers (oh my!) are theoretically able to violate the transmit power restrictions, frequency band restrictions, and other restrictions put in place to comply with FCC regulations, and so the end user needs to be prevented from having access to that level of control over the hardware at all costs.

      In reality, it is simply so the handset maker can market their new 5G! enabled handset. (when the changes that enable that communication mode are mostly just software, and the older handset can often communicate at that rate just fine with the right blob being pushed into it.)

    34. Re: Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      jesus dude, your UID is showing.

    35. Re:Right to unlock by tepples · · Score: 1

      Buy a phone that you can unlock instead?

      How will that remain possible as other major phone manufacturers targeting major western markets follow the example of Huawei?

    36. Re: Right to unlock by Alumoi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Locking the os prevents morons from bricking their device and demanding a new one.

      It also prevents smart people deleting the crapware, installing an adblocker and firewall.

    37. Re:Right to unlock by StormReaver · · Score: 0

      In the case of operating systems, for example, or let's take iOS on Apple iPhones, there is not really the expectation of being able to put Android on it.

      You need to stop being enslaved by Corporate ideology, and stop arguing against your best interest.

    38. Re: Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's very clear that your toaster analogy is wrong. The market already voted with their wallets once, way back when smartphones were just emerging. bootloader unlock was a huge selling point for htc and later sony-ericsson. This was just about when the first iphone was launched. also TVs are a single use devices and some of them already have linux on them (check out sammygo.tv) .but the TV analogy is besides the point, since non-smart ones were never designed with a bootloader, much less an option to load any OS, while the android smart ones already have "linux" on them.

    39. Re: Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent up please.

      Nerd OSes (LineageOS et al) are niche products now, but once they don't run, the various government agencies have an easier time.

      aRTee

    40. Re:Right to unlock by CoolDiscoRex · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Sorry, but this is in no way, shape or form a 'right'. Governments should not get involved in this. Vote with your wallet. If people want phones whose bootloader they can unlock, they should stop buying Huawei phones immediately.

      The flying monkey fuck they shouldn't. Enforcing laws of ownership is a primary function of government. When you buy a product, it is yours to do as you please. This is a basic tenant of common law dating back hundreds of years. That companies think that they still control the products they sell you is the slipperiest of slopes that needs government intervention before it spreads and becomes out of hand as the 90% sit like frogs in a pot and watch.

      Another primary function of government is to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. As it stands, then 10% have to accept what the 90% will tolerate. As you will hear often, "most customers don't care about unlocking the boot loader", therefore, your private property rights will go away because the 90% don't care, and the market clout of the 10% is simply not enough to make a meaningful difference to manufacturers.

      If you are truly advocating that we only be allowed what the masses will accept, then you're advocating for a whole bag of hurt, not to mention a society which caters only to the whims of the masses, the average IQ of which is now 98.

      It's why people coming back from Asia are startled by how far behind we are technologically. Americans will accept less. It doesn't bode well for our future.

      Relying on the people to enforce your rights via market forces has proven to be a colossal failure as most people, altogether now, "don't care".

      Holding the most technically literate people in a nation slaves to what the masses will accept is very much not a good thing, for reasons which I hope are obvious.

    41. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even worse is that in this case the manufacturer can elect to break, hobble, or add defects to your car AFTER you buy it.

    42. Re:Right to unlock by thegarbz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Governments should not get involved in this.

      You owe many of the comforts of your technology precisely because of government involvement. Everything from being able to repair your car, to not voiding your warranty when looking in the case, it is all thanks to the many laws on the books that protect you.

      Vote with your wallet

      This works only in a free market. Very few of those exist.

    43. Re:Right to unlock by surfcow · · Score: 4, Funny

      So, it's Huawei or the highway, eh?

    44. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about voting with your vote? Current intellectual property laws and the ability to litigate without limit mean that open solutions are legally disadvantaged, in addition to all the other issues you would have challenging a tech giant on their home turf.

      In America, there's not really anyone to vote for on this issue- not even third parties address it, and it isn't in the public dialog nearly enough for the two major parties to push for it.

    45. Re: Right to unlock by SpankiMonki · · Score: 1

      +1 Insightful

    46. Re: Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you have the knowledge to root / unlock / load a custom ROM, you already know which phones you can do that with, or at least know how to search it in about 15 seconds.

      Buy one from that list, and stop bitching.

    47. Re: Right to unlock by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There is nothing magical about their OS build either, other than that it is bundled with crap-ware and may never get a security update.

      This. Huawei only guarantees two years of updates, so if you aren't planning to replace your phone at least every two years, you'll end up on an out-of-date, security-compromised OS with no way to upgrade. If you can unlock your bootloader, you have the option of installing LineageOS and getting several more years out of the device.

      Bootloader locking serves an important purpose, but it should not be legal to deny consumers the ability to unlock their own devices. And that goes for Apple, too. If bootloader unlocking were required by law, no doubt the Android port to iPhones would get updated, not to mention that you'd have people doing things similar to XPostFacto/MacPostFactor, getting newer versions of iOS to run on older hardware.

      Right now, locked bootloaders are turning technology into disposable junk, destroying the resale market, and creating an e-waste nightmare. That alone should be ample reason for the government to get involved.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    48. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rights are collectively determined. Concepts such as trademark and copyright only exist because it was collectively decided to exist. The US's right to keep and bear arms is a right that many other countries don't recognize. Other nations don't have the right to free speech or peaceable assembly (or at least aren't interpreted in quite the same way).

      The same goes for contracts. They are collectively enforced based on laws, so the public has the power to determine the terms/enforcement of contracts. Different states have laws regarding what is legal in a contract. Prenuptial agreements aren't valid in Massachusetts. Contracts with minors might be invalid (depending on age and circumstances).

      Right now, it may be impossible to buy an unlocked bootloader on certain networks. Verizon and Sprint are CDMA networks and have historically only allowed certain phones on their networks, so you can't just buy a GSM phone and stick a SIM in it. This seems to have started to change, since there are some Motorola phones that work on all four networks.

    49. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, but this is in no way, shape or form a 'right'. Governments should not get involved in this. Vote with your wallet. If people want phones whose bootloader they can unlock, they should stop buying Huawei phones immediately.

      And you have missed the point of a government. Especially, but not only, in democratic countries, It is just the will of the people who care to and are effective at influence something. If you aren't actively influencing it one way then it is probably doing the opposite. In this case, pushing for Huawei to lock their bootloaders to ensure that people have operating systems that can be monitored. The 0.1%ers have just got it into your head that government is bad so that they can have more influence over it. You have been tricked.

    50. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and buy WHAT?

      There's the issue - people keep saying vote with your wallet, except when there are no choice but to buy other devices that have the same BS.

    51. Re: Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why should phones be a special class?

    52. Re:Right to unlock by thomst · · Score: 2, Insightful

      r_naked demanded:

      If a phone can't be unlocked so I can install whatever OS I want, then it should not be allowed to be imported into the USA.

      They try to give some bullshit about how it is to protect the network, but that is a load of horseshit.

      It is, indeed, a load of horseshit.

      What's important to grasp here is that it is, in all likelihood, the Chinese government that has ordered Huawei to lock their bootloaders, in order to keep end users from deleting the same Chinese government spyware that led to ZTE being barred from exporting their phones to the USA (and which the idiot has defied his own intelligence agencies to announce that he's going to help ZTE get export licenses to resume).

      If you buy a new Huawei phone from here on out, you'd best assume the Chinese government is getting copies of everything on it, and listening in on every transaction that you use it for - including calls, texts, social media interactions, and so-called "encrypted" communications (which aren't encrypted at the keyboard, at all) ...

      --
      Check out my novel.
    53. Re:Right to unlock by jtgd · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but this is in no way, shape or form a 'right'. Governments should not get involved in this. Vote with your wallet. If people want phones whose bootloader they can unlock, they should stop buying Huawei phones immediately.

      I'm sure their drop in sales by 0.01% will persuade them to capitulate.

      --
      J
    54. Re:Right to unlock by DogDude · · Score: 1

      I am against the government getting involved in most aspects of our lives, but this is flat out a case where government intervention is needed,

      Hahahahahahaha. I shot some water out of my nose after reading this. You want the government to get involved because you can't install the software you want on your toy? Are you being serious?

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    55. Re:Right to unlock by DogDude · · Score: 1

      Don't buy that brand of phone. Problem solved.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    56. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, but this is in no way, shape or form a 'right'. Governments should not get involved in this. Vote with your wallet. If people want phones whose bootloader they can unlock, they should stop buying Huawei phones immediately.

      You are failing to understand what government is in this case. It's just the will of the people who wish to and are effective at influencing this situation. If the government isn't acting for you then it's likely acting against. If you want a fair independent free market then the government has to create it. Currently the government is working to close down unlocked phones because they want to stop effective cryptography. The 0.01%ers telling you to "let the free market get on with it" are just doing that so they have more freedom for their own views. You have been fooled.

    57. Re: Right to unlock by stroxor · · Score: 1

      No they will do 3.5 mm jack

    58. Re:Right to unlock by exomondo · · Score: 1

      If a phone can't be unlocked so I can install whatever OS I want, then it should not be allowed to be imported into the USA.

      So is that just for phones or for any type of computer? At least they are making it very clear so people can make an informed decision, the resolution to this problem is to simply vote with your wallet and support the companies that produce the products you want.

    59. Re:Right to unlock by exomondo · · Score: 2

      Buy a phone that you can unlock instead?

      How will that remain possible as other major phone manufacturers targeting major western markets follow the example of Huawei?

      How will that not remain possible as people vote with their wallets and support manufacturers that do allow unlocking of devices? If you're that worried about it then you should start a campaign to educate people about it and make sure they voice their opinions on why they are making the choices they are.

    60. Re:Right to unlock by exomondo · · Score: 1

      We've seen it with SIM-locking. Voting with your wallet doesn't work in an oligopoly case. There are very few carriers and they all lock their phones.

      No it isn't like SIM locking for exactly the reason you point out: there are very few carriers, but in the case of smartphones there are a vast array of manufacturers, it isn't an oligopoly, in fact you can even build your own phone.

    61. Re:Right to unlock by exomondo · · Score: 1

      A bootloader locked phone is like a car with the hood welded shut.

      Right so why would you buy it? There are plenty of cars that don't have the hoods welded shut, go buy one of them.

    62. Re:Right to unlock by brantondaveperson · · Score: 1

      Don't buy any brand of smartphone. Problem even more solved.

    63. Re:Right to unlock by supernova87a · · Score: 1

      Well, I have to agree that you are free to tinker with the phone that you purchased as much as you like. And there is no law preventing you from doing that.

      But the phone manufacturer is equally free to design it as much as it likes to prevent tampering / loading of foreign or unsigned code.

      If you don't like that, by all means choose a different computer / phone. No law exists to say that you have a right to compel the manufacturer to enable you to do what you want.

    64. Re:Right to unlock by DogDude · · Score: 1

      Don't buy any brand of smartphone. Problem even more solved.

      Very true. Smart phones certainly aren't necessary to most people.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    65. Re:Right to unlock by vlad30 · · Score: 1

      After all how are you going to remove the Chinese Govs spyware and install the USA's Gov's spyware or the French Europeans Freedom-ware

      --
      Your'e all thinking it, I just said it for you
    66. Re: Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right so why would you buy it? There are plenty of cars that don't have the hoods welded shut, go buy one of them.

      Sure, until there aren't any. See, that's the flaw in the free market that people like you try to get everyone to ignore with simpleminded answers. Nobody's obligated to do things a certain way unless they're forced. That force can come from the market or it can come from the government.

      So why should it? Well, because the second principle of a free market is that all parties have equal access to accurate information. Cars don't have their hoods welded shut because (enough) people get that they have choices of different kinds of service levels they can pay for. Cars DO have a problem with manufacturers locking down what should be open diagnostics, screwing over third party repair shops, largely because consumers are unaware of this being a problem. That actually requires regulation due to lack of expertise of consumers, and thankfully gets it in some places.

      Now, imagine it being possible to buy a phone and install a crapware and spyware free operating system on it easily. Lots of people, even non technical ones, would choose that option--they'd even pay for it. Thus a market would form and people who want that would have it, plus information would get out that it is possible and safe. But that wouldn't work if there was a decent possibility of your hardware not working after such an operation AND an inability to set the phone back the way it came if things went wrong.

      That's the situation we have now. Changing operating systems is risky, but mostly because of crap that phone manufacturers do which prevents it--thus relegating this kind of thing to the dark alleys of the tech world and preventing people from clamoring for it in the first place.

      Now, in fairness, a lot of the same things that keep people from replacing their phone OSs also keep malicious types from adding malware to phones (yeah, I know, but it helps at least), and I certainly don't expect phone makers to solve third party OS issues. In the PC world we've learned how to deal with that and it could be the same way with phones.

      The inability of a market to form properly is exactly the kind of thing that needs regulation though.

    67. Re: Right to unlock by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Then we will just have to band together and design, manufacture, and market a phone geared towards geeks. The major brands already have all kinds of shortcomings which most of us can agree on; there's a market there just waiting to be filled.

    68. Re: Right to unlock by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      This. The manufacturer of the phone I currently have provides bootloader unlocking for one of their US models, but not for any of the half dozen other models they manufacture. So the only way for me to unlock it was to use a shitty hack to install an unlocked US bootloader. The forums are full of people who screwed it up and got a brick, but there's not a peep from anyone bricking the phone which can be officially unlocked.

    69. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't buy that brand of phone. Problem solved.

      Spoken like a true dullard asshole MBA.

      Everything is black and white in your greedy little world.

    70. Re: Right to unlock by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Sure, until there aren't any. See, that's the flaw in the free market that people like you try to get everyone to ignore with simpleminded answers.

      It's a flaw with a built-in solution; in a free market you can manufacture and market your own phone which doesn't have these limitations. Granted, that can be difficult and costly, but today it is far easier than it has ever been historically. You don't even need venture capitalists to buy into your idea; you can develop a plan, put it up on kick starter, and start sending out links. If enough people are interested you will get plenty of cash; certainly enough to get through the design, development, and testing stages. That much interest will also make your business more attractive to investors, so you should have very little difficulty obtaining further funding for large scale manufacturing and distribution.

      Don't pretend that this is a "free market" issue. It's not. Closed markets have the same problem without the solution. Just ask any citizen of the former USSR about their choice of vehicles, clothing, and electronics back in the 70s/80s.

    71. Re:Right to unlock by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      The whole point of them providing unlocked bootloaders was to appeal to the USA modding scene, on the back of their Nexus device.

      But with Huawei struggling to conquer the American market, or perhaps in collusion with US carriers, they remove the 'feature'.

    72. Re: Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because phones are phones. Other stuff is other stuff? Maybe if you asked a better question, you would get a better answer.

    73. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember there was a time I was supposed to pay extra to unlock the ability to do a wifi-hotspot on my phone. I installed a custom ROM and did it for free instead. That is flat out a software level lockout and was complete BS. As long as I don't go over my bandwidth limits/data cap it shouldn't matter how I'm using my data.

    74. Re:Right to unlock by tepples · · Score: 1

      How will that not remain possible as people vote with their wallets and support manufacturers that do allow unlocking of devices?

      For the same reason people can't buy netbooks that ship with X11/Linux in stores. Instead, you end up with Chromebooks that, once put in developer mode, destroy the file system if someone turns one on and looks at it funny.

      If you're that worried about it then you should start a campaign to educate people about it and make sure they voice their opinions on why they are making the choices they are.

      Do you have any tips for teaching people to care?

    75. Re:Right to unlock by jenningsthecat · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but this is in no way, shape or form a 'right'. Governments should not get involved in this.

      Seems to me that it IS a right, similar to and related to 'right to repair'. In what fundamental way is after-market software different from the after-market hardware used to repair phones? And how is locking the software down to one vendor's offering different from locking the hardware against third-party replacement services and parts?

      Sorry, but this is in no way, shape or form a 'right'... Vote with your wallet. If people want phones whose bootloader they can unlock, they should stop buying Huawei phones immediately.

      And what happens when ALL vendors refuse to allow bootloader unlocking? In that scenario "vote with your wallet" means not owning a phone, period.

      Governments should not get involved in this.

      Too late - governments are already involved. And to the extent that those governments practise various forms of corporate welfare, they also have the right to exercise a certain amount of control and direction when it comes to such things as unlockable bootloaders in phones.

      --
      'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
    76. Re:Right to unlock by jenningsthecat · · Score: 1

      +1 Insightful - it's at least an ideology, and perhaps even a religion.

      In the case of operating systems, for example, or let's take iOS on Apple iPhones, there is not really the expectation of being able to put Android on it.

      You need to stop being enslaved by Corporate ideology, and stop arguing against your best interest.

      --
      'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
    77. Re:Right to unlock by OpenGLFan · · Score: 1

      Right so why would you buy it? There are plenty of cars that don't have the hoods welded shut, go buy one of them.

      That's not for lack of trying. See the Motor Vehicle Owners' Right to Repair Act. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      If it weren't against the law, car hoods would absolutely be sealed so that only the dealerships could repair them. Hopefully we can get that kind of consumer protection for our phones as well.

    78. Re:Right to unlock by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      You don't think it's interesting that this happened shortly after our own government warned people to not buy Huawei phones, because they spy on people?

      Use your brain.

    79. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sadly, anything IT-related is powered by the erosion of our rights*. How can we expect the invisible, geeky issue of bootloaders to be fixed in our favor when more visible issues had nothing worthwhile? First, "they" came for our y2k era resolutions and we did nothing. More recently, we were mugged for our "real" keys and keyboards (don't limit thinking to laptop layouts because sliding physical keypads standardized for the early mobile devices were also altered or eliminated). Double whammy if you are a mac user losing the physical escape key. We lost replaceable batteries, 3.5 mm jacks, sd slots, 3.2" and 4" inch smartphones beyond shady kickstarter offers...

      We are losing the right to own our paid software versus renting it, because it wasn't enough just losing the right to do whatever we wanted with the product key on the case, after losing the right to have key-free installations. On a similar vein, the ability to say "no" to updates, because companies now install sneaky auto-update daemons and naggy screens that long predate Windows 10's practices and were equally as devious.

      Anything IT-related is also about the erosion of our privacy, as we are finding out more and more. Nobody went to jail for the NSA Snowden revelations (all 325+ million Americans), so why would they go to jail for the Experian breach (146+ million), let alone smaller breaches like the recent Facebook one which only hit a lowly 50+ million according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Analytica#Privacy_issues ?

      Did I mention that we lost the right to telemetry-free software?
      We are on the way to locked-down appliances and pay-per-month web services with micropayments. The appliances must be replaced after the cycle they are designed for, because they are upgrade-hostile and eventually will be licensed to expire shamelessly. In New York one must lose perfectly functional transit cards when they reach an arbitrary date set a year in the future. There's a replacement cost of $1.

      The only tips are to continue privately telling whoever is genuinely interested why we continue to avoid or boycott some products. IME computer illiterate friends asking for brand advise will respect hearing our feedback of "don't buy X" only if they already have a preconceived fallback of "buy Y" alternative independent of our advise. If our brand advise clashes, they tend to ignore ours ("you geeks are weird and my heart [boiling down to TV ads or dubious but affordable deals] tells me X is better"). The problem is when alternatives have been whittled down to zero as every industry leader reduces the value of our dollar.

    80. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the majority of the market dont care about unlocking or even know what it is

    81. Re:Right to unlock by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      The right of first sale is a right. And it should be defended.

      Would the "right to bear arms" be a right if anyone who saw you armed was allowed to shoot you? Would it matter if the NRA encouraged all shop owners to shoot gun buyers?

      That you think the free market should drive people to shops that don't kill them doesn't mean it's OK in the first place.

      Anything that infringes on my right of first sale should have a valid reason behind it. Hopefully, one I agree with.

    82. Re: Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok get the government out of the way and just repeal the DMCA.

    83. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's been true since a couple years ago now.

      All OEM laptops will only boot an OS that has its boot loader digitally signed by Microsoft to be allowed to boot. It's a requirement to have their "Windows 10" certification sticker, and an OEM Win10 installation on them.

      That's not true at all. There is nothing at all in the certification requirements that prevent any laptop manufacturer from allowing users to disable secureboot entirely. They must include secureboot and be able to use that to boot a digitally signed OS but there is nothing to say you can't turn that off, in fact Microsoft's own Surface and Surface Book devices allow you to turn that off and boot a non-signed OS.

    84. Re:Right to unlock by exomondo · · Score: 1

      That's not for lack of trying. See the Motor Vehicle Owners' Right to Repair Act. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... If it weren't against the law, car hoods would absolutely be sealed so that only the dealerships could repair them. Hopefully we can get that kind of consumer protection for our phones as well.

      That wasn't law until only a couple of years ago, I don't remember car hoods being welded shut before that...and they certainly had welders.

    85. Re:Right to unlock by exomondo · · Score: 1

      For the same reason people can't buy netbooks that ship with X11/Linux in stores.

      Because nobody wants them? (or at least not enough people to make it worthwhile to produce, ship and stock them).

      Do you have any tips for teaching people to care?

      Present an appealing case. If you can't do that then perhaps you need to re-think your position.

    86. Re: Right to unlock by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Right so why would you buy it? There are plenty of cars that don't have the hoods welded shut, go buy one of them.

      Sure, until there aren't any. See, that's the flaw in the free market that people like you try to get everyone to ignore with simpleminded answers.

      You're proposing a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. Are there any cars that have their hoods welded shut?

      In terms of this relating to phones there are plenty of phones that have unlocked bootloaders, you can even build your own phone with a raspberry pi if you're that paranoid about a dystopian future. There might even be a viable business in that for you.

    87. Re:Right to unlock by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Why not? If I want to try? Or develop my own OS?

      Go for it, you own the device, do whatever you want with it.

      How is it any different whether it's a pocket-sized computer (aka phone) or a full computer (laptop/desktop)?

      There's not much difference, you can build a smartphone just like you can build a desktop. If you want real freedom over it then do that.

      By your logic, there no expectation to wipe Mac OS and install Linux or BSD on an Apple laptop either.

      There's no expectation to be able to wipe the OS on an XBox or Wii or PSP either, most people understand that.

    88. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, not everyone of them are doing that yet.
      Some Chinese brands still allows you to install whatever you want.
      (Yep, you pretty much have to go Chinese if you want to be able to get rid of any potential spyware, despite what they tell you.)

      However, if people don't care about that when buying phones then there is very little reason for them to keep selling them.

    89. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because the things you claim to be 'rights' are not rights. They were a status quo that you happily enjoyed, now that status quo has shifted and that requires you to shift as well, either with it or in a different direction entirely. You don't have to use Windows and you don't have to use cloud-based software, you've never had to. The issue really is that it was always easier and provided a better (for the majority of people) experience than the alternatives so people used Windows instead of GNU/Linux, Photoshop instead of GIMP, etc.

      Those privileges are no longer afforded to you so now you need to invest in projects that do afford you thos privileges. GNU/Linux and free software, yes it will cost you time, money or both to invest but the alternative is you accept the fact that you have to give up the privileges you used to have.

    90. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "He says it's different this time, he won't hit me again."

    91. Re: Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look, I'm bothered as much as you are about not being able to unlock phones, but requiring them to be unlockable is a bad idea. If your phone can be unlocked, that breaks the security model that some applications require, especially when a high security clearance is required, while you're also required to carry the phone around 24/7. And no, security clearance doesn't necessarily mean government employee, or even government contractor.

    92. Re:Right to unlock by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      I bought two Huaweis so far, basically to give away. Considered picking up one for me as a low end replacement for my aging Nexus, but that thought is well and truly gone, completely, forever. Probably Motorola next, since I am nothing but impressed with the last one and they seem to agree that unlocking is a thing.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    93. Re: Right to unlock by sjames · · Score: 1

      Proper design and easy access to factory images prevents users from bricking their phones. Bricking happens because users are forced to use hacks to get around locked boot loaders.

      A properly designed phone won't brick even if you deliberately flash random data over the OS. It just won't be usable until you re-flash a valid os image over the random data.

    94. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the same reason people can't buy netbooks that ship with X11/Linux in stores. Instead, you end up with Chromebooks that, once put in developer mode, destroy the file system if someone turns one on and looks at it funny.

      They are getting better with Crostini. It's still in alpha / beta, but the VM within locked down space running Linux natively is quite usable without the instability or FS destruction. You just have to be a little patient - things take time to brew.

      If you're that worried about it then you should start a campaign to educate people about it and make sure they voice their opinions on why they are making the choices they are.

      Do you have any tips for teaching people to care?

      I care. But then again, I run the OnePlus One from 2014 under the same Cyanogen Mod OS ... Maybe the new Hydrogen phone from Red or the OnePlus 6 or the Essential phone or the Google Pixel 3 will be my next phone to replace the 2014... My point is that some Chinese manufacturer doesn't dictate your choices.

      If only there were a phone manufacturer that proudly built their phone in the USA, I might be tempted to patronize them instead.

    95. Re:Right to unlock by sjames · · Score: 1

      Had your argument held sway in the late '70s and early '80s, there would be no Windows or Linux. We would all still be dinking around on DOS 32.5

      Perhaps YOU have no such expectation, but people who know what they're doing do have such an expectation.

    96. Re: Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit. The established players will easily outcompete you at making cars or phones. The 'free market' as it curently stands if ripe with abuses like that. Monopolies, businesses writing their own legislation. If you were a threat to their business model they would buy you out or bury you in legal paperwork before you had a chance.

      Now it's your turn to claim we don't really have a 'free market'. And yes that's the point, thats the propblem the parent was complaining about and you said a free market was the solution...

    97. Re: Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a flaw with a built-in solution; in a free market you can manufacture and market your own phone which doesn't have these limitations. Granted, that can be difficult and costly, but today it is far easier than it has ever been historically.

      You can make one, but as soon as you start trying to sell one all the major phone manufacturer's will have lawyers lined up at your door carrying dozens of stupid broad patents they claim you are violating. Even if you aren't, they'll keep you busy with legal proceedings long enough for all of your money to evaporate.

    98. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Very true. Smart phones certainly aren't necessary to most people.

      Not necessary true, makes life a lot easier in a modern society false.

      I don't want to switch back to a physical calendar, alarmclock, mp3 player, GPS, newspaper as well as carry around a laptop to browse the web.

    99. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > in fact you can even build your own phone

      That's a incredibly shitty phone, you can't even compare that to a modern smartphone.

    100. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      voting with my wallet didn't stop phone makers from removing physical key boards and removing expandable storage vis SD cards. I agree with you that calling it a "right" is contentious. I don't know if I consider it a right or not. But this whole "wallet voting" thing isn't all it's cracked up to be. Not when every phone maker follows apple. Voting with my wallet hasn't stopped the notch-ification of displays in an arms race to brag about creating whole square centimeters more of screen space that no one cares about.

    101. Re: Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unlocking == no software warranty. Why is this so hard?

    102. Re:Right to unlock by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      The Librarian has already ordered long ago that phones must be unlockable.

    103. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, but certain car companies who charge too much for their shitty cars would void your warranty if you changed your own oil.

      Stop being a corporate shill. The freedom to tinker is not trivial.

    104. Re:Right to unlock by tepples · · Score: 1

      For the same reason people can't buy netbooks that ship with X11/Linux in stores.

      Because nobody wants them?

      I guess that makes me a nobody, as I used a 10" Dell Inspiron mini 1012 laptop for about 7 years in order to work on programming projects while riding the bus in a city whose buses do not provide free Wi-Fi to riders.

      As for your other point: If there were "not enough people to make it worthwhile to produce, ship and stock" compact X11/Linux laptops, what makes you think there are "enough people to make it worthwhile to produce, ship and stock" pocket computers capable of running a user-provided operating system?

    105. Re:Right to unlock by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

      I had one (the mate 9.) It really was my favorite phone.

      It is difficult to root and mod but it was the first phone that I didn't feel the need to mod and root (install blocka instead.)

      Plus android has made root so limiting nowadays as they detect for it and offer publishers the tools to detect if the phone is rooted or modified. I know there are workarounds like magisk but it is always a back and forth game.

      I wish the Ubuntu or firefox phone had taken off and been successful.

    106. Re: Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree that some alternatives to certain things still exists but for the most part. .we are screwed...

      I am ashamed to be working in IT...

      Not because I work for one of the scumbag companies like Apple, Google, Amazon, Facebook or Microsoft

      But because IT as a field is rotting like an old carcass because of the continued loss of the status quo.

    107. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It unfortunately does make you a nobody. How many people have you seen using netbooks in public like you do? Or even mention that they use a netbook at all, even on 'geek' communities like this one?

    108. Re:Right to unlock by imrahilj · · Score: 1

      My guess is that the bootloader locking isn't so much the carriers (because they already cut Huawei out) - seems to me that it is more likely a result of the ongoing pressure being applied by the feds.

    109. Re:Right to unlock by imrahilj · · Score: 1

      The whole point of voting is to satisfy the majority. If you are a member of a minority, you may not want things to be decided by votes, whether monetary or at the ballot box.

    110. Re:Right to unlock by exomondo · · Score: 1

      I guess that makes me a nobody, as I used a 10" Dell Inspiron mini 1012 laptop for about 7 years in order to work on programming projects while riding the bus in a city whose buses do not provide free Wi-Fi to riders.

      Relatively speaking, yes. This experiment has been tried and proved it was not viable.

      As for your other point: If there were "not enough people to make it worthwhile to produce, ship and stock" compact X11/Linux laptops, what makes you think there are "enough people to make it worthwhile to produce, ship and stock" pocket computers capable of running a user-provided operating system?

      I don't if it meant a producing, shipping and stocking a different device, but if it means simply allowing a bootloader unlock on existing devices then I think that's viable.

    111. Re:Right to unlock by exomondo · · Score: 1

      What car companies did that?

    112. Re:Right to unlock by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Had your argument held sway in the late '70s and early '80s, there would be no Windows or Linux. We would all still be dinking around on DOS 32.5

      What argument? The modern PC was born out of the innovation of companies that provided value through separation of software and hardware rather than the incumbents of the day, now the majority of people prefer a tighter coupling of software and hardware rather than a customized setup but there's no reason you can't go back to building a smartphone or tablet from component pieces just like we do with PCs. Yes you do then need to deal with incompatibilities yourself but we've been doing that with PCs for decades so it's not really that big of a deal.

      Perhaps YOU have no such expectation, but people who know what they're doing do have such an expectation.

      I have no expectation that this be a capability on all devices, I don't expect it on an Xbox for example so instead I buy a PC.

    113. Re: Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. Huawei only guarantees two years of updates, so if you aren't planning to replace your phone at least every two years, you'll end up on an out-of-date, security-compromised OS with no way to upgrade. If you can unlock your bootloader, you have the option of installing LineageOS and getting several more years out of the device.

      How many years of support does LineageOS guarantee for your device?

    114. Re:Right to unlock by sjames · · Score: 1

      So, if you try to use a screwdriver as an improvised deadbolt, do you expect a defeat device to activate to eject the screwdriver? If you try to use duck tape as a textile, do you expect a special mechanism to unravel it?

      Why should anyone expect a device to have a "feature" specifically to keep them from modifying it and potentially re-purposing it? Further, why should they be stuck paying extra for the engineering behind the anti-feature?

      And no, there is no user preference to a locked down device. It's just that that's all that's on offer.

      When the PC came out, nobody at all imagined that they would one day be running a variant of Unix and acting as publicly accessible servers. It wasn't designed to run a variety of OSes, it just wasn't designed specifically NOT to. Interestingly, the entire intel 80x86 processor line wasn't designed to be a main processor, it was supposed to be an I/O coprocessor. The chip intended to be the main processor was so over-compiliaced that engineers discovered that the machine ran much faster if they ignored it and did the computation on the "i/o coprocessors). Again, a good thing the "co-processors" weren't specifically designed to NOT be useful as a CPU.

    115. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Enforcing laws of ownership is a primary function of government. When you buy a product, it is yours to do as you please. This is a basic tenant of common law dating back hundreds of years.

      That has nothing to do with this at all. You are free to do whatever you like with the product, by all means hack the bootloader and put a different OS on it, they aren't stopping you from doing that in fact 'jailbreak' hacks get done all the time.

      That companies think that they still control the products they sell you is the slipperiest of slopes that needs government intervention before it spreads and becomes out of hand as the 90% sit like frogs in a pot and watch.

      What kind of product are you talking about? This is about phones being sold that do not provide access to the bootloader, if you want a product that gives you that then buy one of the many that does. These companies have no control of what you do with your product as you claim as evidenced by the fact that many people hack in bootloader access and the companies can do nothing about that.

      As you will hear often, "most customers don't care about unlocking the boot loader", therefore, your private property rights will go away because the 90% don't care

      No you misunderstand. An unlocked bootloader is not a 'private property right', you certainly have the right to do whatever you want with the device. Now you can make the argument that it *should* be a right but arguing that your rights are violated in this context is simply wrong.

      Holding the most technically literate people in a nation slaves to what the masses will accept is very much not a good thing, for reasons which I hope are obvious.

      That's where we need doers, not complainers! When the world was ruled by computers that had their hardware and software tied together we didn't have people whining about it with false claims that their rights were being violated, no we had some people hacking the hardware to add software and people that came along with innovative custom-built hardware and software combinations that birthed the modern PC, yes in the beginning they were clunkier and suffered incompatibilities and stability issues but they offered real value as well. There is no reason whatsoever that this can't happen in the smartphone/tablet market.

    116. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      buy a lenovo or a dell.

      both supply laptops with ubuntu preinstalled.

    117. Re:Right to unlock by exomondo · · Score: 1

      And what happens when ALL vendors refuse to allow bootloader unlocking? In that scenario "vote with your wallet" means not owning a phone, period.

      Or building your own phone as you can do today with a Raspberry Pi and a few other components. Niche market is going to require a niche solution, alternatively you can campaign to have the majority share in your concerns if you can make a compelling case.

    118. Re:Right to unlock by exomondo · · Score: 2

      We've been hearing that the sky is falling for decades now and yet even today major vendors offer various OS options (including Linux) on their computers and even Microsoft provide a mechanism for disabling SecureBoot on their own devices so you can install other operating systems on them, people have even installed macOS on the Surface Book! The transition from PowerPC to Intel meant you could install Windows on a Mac and even with the introduction of Chromebooks you can run other Linux distributions as a replacement (or alongside) ChromeOS.

      Today we have broader device/OS compatibility than we ever have before despite what you fear-mongerers keep saying. Saying the opposite to what you said is just as credible in terms of evidence but it also agrees with the trend we have been seeing in recent years.

    119. Re:Right to unlock by exomondo · · Score: 1

      So, if you try to use a screwdriver as an improvised deadbolt, do you expect a defeat device to activate to eject the screwdriver?

      I can use a phone as an improvised deadbolt if I want and there's no defeat device to eject it. I can do many things with a smartphone that it was not designed for and there is mechanism to prevent it. I can hack the bootloader on many different phones and there's nothing anybody can do about that.

      Why should anyone expect a device to have a "feature" specifically to keep them from modifying it and potentially re-purposing it?

      Well they decided to glue the handle of my screwdriver on rather than screw it on which means I can't repurpose the components like I would be able to do had they made it easy to separate them, are you rallying against the manufacturers of screwdrivers with the handles glued on?

      Further, why should they be stuck paying extra for the engineering behind the anti-feature?

      They aren't stuck, you still have the choice of a myriad of other devices or the option to build your own if you really want.

      And no, there is no user preference to a locked down device. It's just that that's all that's on offer.

      No, that's not all that's on offer. There are plenty of options and you can innovate on your own if none of those satisfy you.

    120. Re:Right to unlock by sjames · · Score: 1

      Well they decided to glue the handle of my screwdriver on rather than screw it on which means I can't repurpose the components like I would be able to do had they made it easy to separate them, are you rallying against the manufacturers of screwdrivers with the handles glued on?

      Actually, they are interference fitted, not glued. And it wasn't done at extra expense to make it harder for you to modify the screwdriver. In contrast, the bootloader lockdowns require extra effort on their part and it is to keep you from loading a different OS image.

      Now, can you name phones that have unlocked bootloaders or are you just "sure" there must be some? In fact, there are but the list grows shorter by the day and most require begging the manufacturer and the cooperation of the carrier.

    121. Re:Right to unlock by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Broken analogies is not the way to convince people of your argument, these companies are free to build the product however they like and you are free to do with it whatever you like. Usage of an unlocked bootloader is a niche case and it therefore is serviced as a niche market, if you want broader choice you need to make sure that it appeals to the broader market. That separation of hardware and software in the PC market came because it offered people innovative solutions, the smartphone market moved to SoCs which removed the customizability of the system hardware to serve customer demands for smaller and more powerful devices.

      I can understand your point of view but I can also understand that of companies like Apple and Huawei that want to provide a tightly integrated device rather than just bits for consumers to cobble together and them allowing users to change X to do something else under the assumption that the change to X would have no impact the workings of the rest of the system is detrimental (broadly) to their brand and business. What they are offering is something different to what you want in the same way console manufacturers are offering something different to their customers than to PC gamers even if, fundamentally, under the covers the hardware is pretty similar. They should not be beholden to give you what you want just because you want it.

      They are offering you a console, you want a PC, so go and buy the most official Android phone you can (the Google Pixel) or one from brands that make this customization part of their business like OnePlus or you can go and build your own phone, hell go and buy a whole bunch of them in case of hardware failure then you'll never have to worry about it again because you can just maintain your own OS on them. Support the brands that support your view rather than whining that you can't run The GIMP on an XBox despite it being theoretically possible.

      But what's really your goal here, is this just your wishful thinking? Or are you going to the government to try and get them to strongarm these companies? (they haven't had much success strongarming Apple in the past for example) Or are you going to these companies and trying to get them to change their position on this?

    122. Re:Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A bootloader locked phone is like a car with the hood welded shut. Most people don't know or care about what's under the hood until it breaks. And once it does, they have a reasonable expectation of being able to take it to the nearest repair guy to get it working again.

      Getting my car serviced by anybody costs more than my couple hundred dollar smartphone and it's not really worth my time to do it myself. If I'm getting random freezes on my phone that's under warranty I can take it to the manufacturer and they'll replace it, if I've got some random OS on there how much is it going to cost to hire a software developer to examine the OS and hardware to determine and fix the fault? Probably more than it would cost to just replace the phone.

    123. Re:Right to unlock by sjames · · Score: 1

      It was YOUR analogy! Don't complain to me if it's broken!

      The thing is, there is nothing niche about internet connected devices needing security updates. There is also nothing unusual about woefully out of date cellphones because the carrier or manufacturer wrote the devices off within a year of sale and locked the owner out of 3rd party updates. It is not unreasonable that the owner of any device should expect that no special measures have been taken to prevent their personal modifications to the device beyond any intrinsic difficulty. That was finally made law in the case of automobiles, I don't see why it shouldn't be in the case of cellphones. The manufacturers are well aware that people want at least the ability to update their phones, they just don't care.

    124. Re: Right to unlock by r_naked · · Score: 1

      So you don't want government to get involved unless it's something you want (but don't need) then they should. I suppose you feel the same about what other people want but dont need, like needing to eat, being educated, freedom from persecution, or any other such stupid pointless thing that would be far less important than having a phone with an unlocked bootloader?

      I have dream that one day all men and women will have the right to a phone with an unlocked bootloader!

      Is this article about food, or education, or persecution? No? OK then.

      Since this article is about a technical aspect of our lives (and make no mistake, having a cell phone is pretty much mandatory in order to live a normal life these day), I will stay on that topic.

      Some posts in this thread have suggested voting with our wallets. That is working for me -- for now. However, the number of phones that can have their bootloaders unlocked is going DOWN not UP.

      This shouldn't just be about unlocking bootloaders. When you unlock the bootloader, what you are unlocking is aboot (sbl2, abl, etc depending on the manufacturer) also known as the apps bootloader. When you unlock it, it no longer checks the integrity of boot, recovery, and maybe a few other partitions.

      What you CAN'T do, with ANY phone, is install a completely different bootstack / firmware (at least on SnapDragon based CPUs). On SD CPUs there is an RSA key that is stored in QFPROM (inside the CPU). When the PBL (Primary Boot Loader -- also contained inside the CPU) loads sbl1 (xbl on SD820 and later), it verifies the signature. If it doesn't match, then it won't load it. Every piece of the bootstack and firmware have an RSA signature.

      I want the ability to COMPLETELY disable secure boot, so that I can run whatever I want. Do I have to develop it myself? Sure -- right now. There are no alternatives, because there can BE NO ALTERNATIVES.

      A smartphone is just a PC that can make phone calls. With wireless display technology, and Bluetooth, my phone is more than capable of replacing my laptop. Is it going to be a gaming beast? Nope, but neither is my laptop.

      If RSA signing had been around back when Phoenix was developing their BIOS clone, think where we would be today in terms of the PC. Actually, I can't imagine how bad it would be. I am sure there will be people that say that the market would have taken care of that. Maybe, but it also could have been a huge fragmented mess, and most likely they ALL would have RSA signed firmware.

      --
      -- http://anonet.org -- The internet the way it was meant to be. Check it out, you may be surprised.
    125. Re: Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then we will just have to band together and design, manufacture, and market a phone geared towards geeks. ...which, if anywhere near successful, would be instantly crushed by the massive patent portfolios of the existing phone makers, without whose patents it is effectively impossible to make a functional phone.

    126. Re: Right to unlock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your toaster won't become dangerous to use after two years because it no longer receives security updates.
      Your TV will still work as a TV with the internal 'Smart' features disconnected and unsupported.
      Your car won't become dangerous to use after two years because it no longer receives security updates.

      Your smartphone will, as a deliberate choice of the manufacturers, become unsupported and thus dangerous to use after a couple of years or so, and the manufacturers deliberately prevent you from putting a supported OS on it.

      A double dumb-ass on you.

    127. Re:Right to unlock by exomondo · · Score: 1

      It was YOUR analogy! Don't complain to me if it's broken!

      No, the analogy to games consoles is perfectly valid, the one to screwdrivers being used as deadbolts is nonsense.

      The thing is, there is nothing niche about internet connected devices needing security updates.

      Right, and Apple does a fine job of that so the suggestion that unlocking the bootloader solves that or is necessary for that is untrue.

      There is also nothing unusual about woefully out of date cellphones because the carrier or manufacturer wrote the devices off within a year of sale and locked the owner out of 3rd party updates.

      Yes, that is a problem and I do agree with you on that, I think manufacturers need to take a lot more responsibility for that or do as you say and put the onus on the consumer.

      The manufacturers are well aware that people want at least the ability to update their phones, they just don't care.

      The issue is that the vast majority of people don't care either and while phones with unlocked bootloaders are plentiful people will buy the ones with locked bootloaders so the companies themselves see their customers as being indifferent to it. If this announcement results in a sharp drop in sales then certainly the company will notice, if not then they remain indifferent and I suggest either you buy the products that meet your requirements (be that unlocked bootloaders or companies that support the product effectively) or form some sort of activist group to petition the government to address the issue.

    128. Re:Right to unlock by sjames · · Score: 1

      3 or 4 named out of the dizzying variety of phones out there doesn't really constitute plentiful.

    129. Re:Right to unlock by exomondo · · Score: 1

      If you really care about it then do something about it or stop whining about it.

    130. Re:Right to unlock by tepples · · Score: 1

      Dell.com doesn't offer Ubuntu laptops in all sizes in which it offers Windows laptops. I think its smallest Ubuntu laptop is the XPS 13, not the Inspiron 11.

  2. Right to complain. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What OS? Just what do you think you're going to put on your iPhone, let alone Android?

    1. Re: Right to complain. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Lineage OS? Or any of a dozen other smaller specialised distros?

    2. Re:Right to complain. by SumDog · · Score: 1

      PostmarketOS.

    3. Re:Right to complain. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You have no idea indeed. That CPU is supported does not mean that you can run the OS on it because in embedded device world all the chipsets and all are variety of different incompatible ones. "provided proper driver support" is real hard to come by. So no, theoretically ARM OS won't run on any ARM devices. You might have different meaning to "theoretically" from others.

    4. Re:Right to complain. by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      provided proper driver support

      That's the problem.
      It's not just driver support either, it's board support. The same components can be put together in different ways, requiring different configuration of the drivers for different devices.
      There's no standard "plug and play" system to auto-detect all the connected hardware for these systems either, you end up needing a custom device tree for every variation of every device, which specified which drivers to load, what memory addresses are required to access them, which GPIO pins control them, etc.
      It's like PC's were back in the ISA slot days, except they all had a standard BIOS to boot the computer to a usable state.

      All the different SoC manufacturers have different boot processes too. Some of them are absolutely horrible like the Broadcom chips in the Raspberry Pi, where the main processor is the proprietary video core and the ARM CPU is just a co-processor.

      Different devices with the same SoC might need different boot code too, as the storage could be on the eMMC port, MMC0, MMC1, USB, SATA, PCIe, etc.
      You can't just probe all of them, or you'll end up with someone booting malware from the SD card they inserted.

    5. Re: Right to complain. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While most of what you said is true, stuff like gpio pins are irrelevant.

      Again, go look at the Android Flash (native arm code) APK running on an i device. Similar translation services could be implemented. Do note that Android itself has methods to run closer to metal with it's NDK, and generally is compatible with all devices despite differences in non cpu hardware

  3. The most mediocre smartphone brand. by blind+biker · · Score: 2

    Huawei has been positioning itself as a higher quality smartphone brand than the rest of the Chinese competition, but fails at it entirely. It is, however, worse value than all other Chinese brands.

    I don't care one way or the other as I have standardized our family on the same model Samsung Galaxy phones (so we can swap batteries and other accessories among us), but from time to time I look into the Chinese brands like OnePlus, Alcatel/TCL, Oppo, Lenovo (though this is partly a Taiwanese brand from a technological POV). Huawei makes just OK phones which have an incredibly uninspiring value.

    I guess they have even more delusions of greatness now, as they think they should stop people from using their phones as they like (like Apple).

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    1. Re:The most mediocre smartphone brand. by houghi · · Score: 1

      First they came for the Apple Phone, but I did not have an Apple phone.
      Then they came for the Huaweii, but I do not own such a phone either ...

      If Samsumg sees that this works and is legal, you can bet your famnilies phones that they (and others) will start to do the same.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    2. Re:The most mediocre smartphone brand. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look at Xiaomi too. Until now they still allow bootloader unlocking.

    3. Re:The most mediocre smartphone brand. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no value? their stuff works, they have some cheap stuff, and i know for a fact they happen to last a while (my mom is on a 70 euros, 2011/12 huawei smartphone that still works to this day, and its unhackable since its connected to nothing at all) she likes it because for some reason sms messages have big ass letters on that version of android and everything on it is EXTRA THICC

      so mission accomplished, would buy again no problem

    4. Re:The most mediocre smartphone brand. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      happy owner of xiaomi redmi

  4. Nope by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Thank you for your continued support."

    There is no support. I don't have much influence in the phone world, but all that I have will now be directed at convincing people away from you.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:Nope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, no support. Support must go both ways.

      Huawei effectively removed any support to reasonably use your property as you wish.
      Instead they force you to use it as better suits their agenda.

    2. Re:Nope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They supported me in making the decision to never ever buy something from Huawei.

      I wonder what they are hiding in their software that they are so forcefully blocking you from removing it?
      Spyware? Probably.. Something worse? Well.. I wonder... But whatever it is, it cannot be something harmless I guess..

    3. Re:Nope by Raenex · · Score: 1

      all that I have will now be directed at convincing people away from you

      Away from Huawei, and towards...? Who are the smart phone manufacturers that let you boot your own OS?

    4. Re:Nope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Thank you for your continued support."

      There is no support. I don't have much influence in the phone world, but all that I have will now be directed at convincing people away from you.

      I dream of a world where you can somehow print you own processors.

    5. Re:Nope by Christian+Smith · · Score: 3, Informative

      all that I have will now be directed at convincing people away from you

      Away from Huawei, and towards...? Who are the smart phone manufacturers that let you boot your own OS?

      Google, Motorola, HTC, Samsung, LG (and they're just the brands I've personally owned and installed Cyanogenmod/LineageOS on.)

    6. Re:Nope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Motorola

    7. Re:Nope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't give LG too much credit; it's been hit-or-miss with many of its phones. For example, the LG G6. The bootloader could be unlocked only on the International variant (despite a bait-and-switch marketing campaign to the contrary), so if you were dumb enough to buy, say, a VS986 (Verizon), you now have a paperweight that hasn't seen an OTA in a year and never will.

    8. Re:Nope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      xiaomi

  5. Re:Professor Stefan Halper by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And 9-11 was a libtard job, duh! ae911truth org

    I won't be sad when the current round of political stupidity ends.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  6. Who said this isn't a government intervention? by evanh · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It certainly wouldn't be the first time a government used a "national security" blanket excuse to covertly force something down a company's gullet.

    1. Re:Who said this isn't a government intervention? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Especially the Red Chinese government. This could well be driven by them ala the Great Firewall.

      R O

    2. Re: Who said this isn't a government intervention? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or by Trump and his NSA.

  7. Re:Professor Stefan Halper by jythie · · Score: 1

    Yeah, but a whole new one usually starts right after.

  8. Re: Time to Damage Infrastructure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shhhhh! Calm down and go back to your cartoons. The adults are talking. Iâ(TM)ll put Harry Potter on your iPod for you.

  9. Good riddance, Huawei. by emil · · Score: 1

    I am very pleased that major U.S. carriers were pressured to dump you. The unlockable bootloaders were likely a ploy anyway. ZTE has given us reason to spurn these products.

  10. Re: Time to Damage Infrastructure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Put your iphone back up your ass and STFU, you jewnìgger piece of shit.

  11. Right to be cheap. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They lock if you buy the phone through them. Do what I did and pay more for an unlocked phone. You hear that? Stop being cheap and pay MORE for an unlocked phone which puts it closer to the MSRP.

    1. Re:Right to be cheap. by Alumoi · · Score: 1

      They lock if you buy the phone through them. Do what I did and pay more for an unlocked phone. You hear that? Stop being cheap and pay MORE for an unlocked phone which puts it closer to the MSRP.

      Idiot much? We're talking about the bootloader not carrier lock. But hey, this is /., we don't RTFA.

    2. Re:Right to be cheap. by DCFusor · · Score: 1

      Follow the $ is often correct. A reason they lock is entitled assholes flash wrong stuff and expect free support. This is a major reason we can't have more nice things. The entitled spoil it for those who are responsible.

      --
      Why guess when you can know? Measure!
    3. Re:Right to be cheap. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BS. A flashed phone is the easiest excuse not to have to provide any support, even when the problem is not related to the non-factory ROM. The real reason is flashed phones allow users to use features they would otherwise have to pay for and to use their phones for much longer than they would otherwise. That's the conclusion you'll make when you follow the $.

  12. regulation of carriers is the normal order by OrangeTide · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'd like to add that networks are built on the common property of wireless airspace. We have granted the government the authority to license the access to the airspace, which the carriers must pay to use. The carriers benefit from something that belongs to the people, and they can continue as long as they operate in a way mutually beneficial way. But careful oversight and regulation of a business using a common property is important to insure that their behavior remains in the public's interests.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    1. Re:regulation of carriers is the normal order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you have granted the government authority- but I have not. I support pirate radio wholeheartedly AND I am a co-host of two different radio shows. One show is even syndicated on 180 radio stations, multiple satellites, and online, and a handful of pirate radio stations, of which are not being counted in the 180 active number. Which if you compare it to how typical shows count number of stations would probably be closer to 500+ in the life of the show.

      I object this nonsensical bull shit that we all gave the government this permission to regulate. A select group of people did prior to my birth and we aught to be looking to change the design of the system via technological means such that there are no carriers in the case of cellular providers. Rather there should be a technological solution to the problem of division. A protocol based around an anonymous (has the zero-coin protocol implemented) crypto currency that covers the cost of accessing a given tower such that anybody who has the resources to put up a tower can provide service. It's utterly ridicules that any entity has the right to airspace over any other entity. And don't confuse this argument with with one in support of some confused misunderstanding of anarchy. I'm not against protocols that enable us all to utilize the space on fair and reasonable terms. I'm against the idea any individual or company has a greater right to the air space than another. Particularly in the context of cellular communications.

      And the way access is gained to broadcast shows or music is also improper. While in some markets the airwaves really are saturated thats hardly the case for the majority of the world. There *should* (not saying there isn't currently) generally be no legal issues with random persons starting up pirate radio stations so long as they don't interfere with others on homesteaded frequencies.

    2. Re:regulation of carriers is the normal order by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      Certainly the current system does not have to remain if enough of us wish to change it. That process should be well understood by everyone. But I don't really have the energy to explain to another slashdotter the ideas of representative democracy and the social contract. Maybe you can audit some classes at at JC?

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  13. Sorry? What did they say? by Chas · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It kinda sounded like "You don't want to buy our stuff. You want to buy stuff from someone who isn't going to place limits on you doing what you want with your own device."

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  14. Grab the unlock codes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For owners of Huawei devices it is important to understand that currently Huawei reinstated the page that one can use to get their devices' bootloader unlocking code.

    That page will vanish in around 60 days and then you will have to find another way (e.g. pay some third party unlocking service) if you do not obtain your unlocking code now.

    While rambling on /. maybe consider grabbing the unlocking codes for your older devices .. Just in case.

    For what its worth it I will never buy a phone that cannot easily be unlocked and hopefully everyone else will be doing similar. Once they see their revenues tumbling they may think over this.

    1. Re: Grab the unlock codes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But they won't, because 99% of their customers don't live on the /. Echo chamber.

      It's not that I don't agree, it's just that you mean nothing to them. You are easily replaceable with the next narcissistic tech nerd.

  15. Re:meta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > It's a pretty safe bet that this isn't the constitutional issue that it's made out to be in comments above.

    That companies can make locked down devices isn't a constitutional issue, but the fact that it is illegal to circumvent these restrictions on devices you own (via the DMCA) is a constitutional issue.

  16. Re: Time to Damage Infrastructure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, because tearing down our critical infrastructure will show those phone manufacturers from some other country who is da boss!!!

  17. So which is it? by morethanapapercert · · Score: 1
    First it says the page was taken down without an explanation, but then it goes on to say that the company did release a statement explaining their reasoning.

    This sort of self contradictory reporting bugs me a lot more than it probably should....

    --
    I need a wheelchair van for my son. Help me get the word out. https://www.gofundme.com/wheelchair-van-for-jj
  18. If it's *my* phone ... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    "In order to deliver the best user experience and prevent users from experiencing possible issues that could arise from ROM flashing, including system failure, stuttering, worsened battery performance, and risk of data being compromised, ...

    ... so why do *you* care what I do with it? If I want a different "user experience" than what you envisioned, why is that your concern?

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:If it's *my* phone ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're impacting their ability to monetize your life and personal information.

      You act like you paid for something and it belongs to you. Greedy thief.

    2. Re:If it's *my* phone ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They care in that people brick their phones and then expect Huawei to replace it. It’s easier to just lock the bootloader and lose the handfull of nerds that care.

  19. I don't like it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So I'm voting with my feet, I decided ages ago that iPhone and Android are garbage. librem5 by Purism here I come. 100% open source means 100% adblocking enabled.

    1. Re:I don't like it by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      You know Librem 5 doesn't actually exist now eh?
      You can pre-order a development kit....
      By the time it gets produced (if it ever does) it's going to be a low to mid range phone performance wise, with an iMX8m cpu. They should have stuck with the iMX8.
      It's a basic 1.5GHz quad core A53 CPU, like mid range phones from 3 years ago - the Moto G from 2015 has a quad core 1.4GHz A53. The iMX8 on the other hand has another 2 A72 cores.
      It'll probably have shit battery life too, as the iMX series aren't designed for phones. Tablets would be the thing with the smallest battery they're designed for.

    2. Re:I don't like it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Low to mid-range... by comparison with the horrifically bloated and slow Android. You want a more accurate comparison, look at the Nokia Winphones. Their specs were much lower than contemporary Android devices, yet by all accounts they were far more responsive in actual use.

      But even if it is, I don't really mind (plus, the idea of running XFCE or Trinity as its public face to save a few more CPU cycles has me giggling inside). The tradeoff here is in favour of actually owning the device, having full control over the entire software stack running on the main CPU, and walling off anything which I don't have full control over (modem, wi-fi). If that means that I get a slower device, which is physically larger and can't keep the lights on for as long as my Galaxy S5, then so be it. I'm willing to pay that price and so, it seems, are all the others who backed it.

  20. Re:Professor Stefan Halper by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    And 9-11 was a libtard job, duh! ae911truth org

    I won't be sad when the current round of political stupidity ends.

    The heat death of the universe is a long time to wait.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  21. Vote with your wallet folks by Order_66 · · Score: 1

    Goodbye Huawei, was nice knowing you for the two devices I had, no more.

  22. Bye Bye Huawei by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bye Bye Huawei.

  23. No Problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hell with 'em all!
    Waiting for the Librem 5
    https://puri.sm/shop/librem-5/

    R O

    1. Re:No Problem by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      It's already obsolete in terms of hardware capability and it's still in development with no end-date in sight.

      It's a nice concept though.

  24. Hauwei's Phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is simply not legal to Tamper with a phone or software owned by Hauwei. Hauwei owns the software,and the hardware, you are simply licensed to use it as Hauwei sees fit. For a small monthly fee, or a small payment, Hauwei licenses you the software and hardware as one unit. You can store data on Hauwei's chips, or Hauwei's servers, and use as much of Hauwei's software and hardware as you like! As long as you respect Hauwei's IP Hauwei's will let you do most everything on Hauwei's devices, a win-win situation.

    Of course, since Hauwei's owns the device, Hauwei can inspect your data, to ensure it meets Hauwei's policies. Hauwei's contacts, Hauwei's data, Hauwei's IP. You are just a licensee of Hauwei.

    Remember, you must obey Hauwei's terms, or Hauwei can deactivate Hauwei's device.

  25. Guess i'll start recommending against it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If i wanted a walled garden i would have chosen Apple.

  26. Re: Fandroids are fags by mSparks43 · · Score: 0

    apple will fix that for you in 6 months.

  27. Easy Fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This issue, like so many others, is not a problem for people who don't use a cell phone. I, as an individual, have little power to protect myself from bulk surveillance and many others forms of invasion of privacy, but I can to stop playing their game by not having a cellphone anymore. Making it illegal to spy on people doesn't seem to be working -- make it impossible to spy on people. I do many other things to prevent leaving a digital trail of breadcrumbs, but that is a discussion for a different post.

  28. If they're saying they're not spying on users..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .... they're certainly not acting like they aren't.

  29. purism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good. More money for Librem Phone.

  30. OK, now a good reason to avoid Huawei by HiThere · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I wasn't impressed when the government told me to avoid them, but now Huawei itself is telling me to avoid them.

    --

    I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    1. Re:OK, now a good reason to avoid Huawei by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amen. Never had any reason to buy a Huawei phone, now, even worse, they just gave me a reason NOT to.

    2. Re:OK, now a good reason to avoid Huawei by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      Oh no, they lost a customer they never had.

  31. Spyware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IF you cannot install/replace the OS then you can't eliminate the spyware. That's what this is all about.

  32. Unlocked it, didn't change OS, won't update by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Huawei is doing everyone a favor by being clear about this.

    Unlocked my Honor 6x ($99), didn't change OS because 2 hrs of attempts failed. Since then, it won't update the OS from the vendor. It keeps downloading and nagging, but won't update. Usually takes 3 attempts to get it to boot the old OS.

    I expect they are doing it so the tracking apps/hidden "phone home" stuff will always be installed across all their phones to help the Chinese govt.

    At least it didn't come pre-installed with Faceboot or tweeeeter.

    I need to try to root it and get LineageOS installed. My Android device FU is weak.

  33. Re: Fandroids are fags by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even slowed down an iPhone is faster than android garbage.

  34. Regulation by nightfire-unique · · Score: 2

    Normally I'm against regulation of technology (in general), but here's a case where we, the people, genuinely need the government to step in. It should be illegal to manufacture, import, or offer for sale any device which contains anti-freedom provisions such as bootloader locking or anti-root measures.

    --
    A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
    1. Re:Regulation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cool story, freetard.

    2. Re:Regulation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not normally for government intervention, except when someone does something that pisses me off and I want to enforce my will on them...said every tyrant ever.

    3. Re:Regulation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cool story, freetard.

      In this case you are clearly the 'tard. You really don't seem to know the meaning of 'cool story'. For the hard of thinking, it means 'I believe you made that story up'.

      So, using it in the context of the GP expressing an opinion as to what *should* happen, rather than relating something that has supposedly *already* happened is meaningless (apart from it showing your gross ignorance.

      TLDR: Don't use words or phrases you don't understand, you'll only make a fool of yourself.

  35. What places allow unlockable bootloaders now? by ctilsie242 · · Score: 1

    It seems like finding something with an unlockable bootloader is virtually impossible these days.

    What companies actually allow it still? HTC is the only one I know.

    1. Re:What places allow unlockable bootloaders now? by cafelatte · · Score: 2

      Just check this site. Anything that allows lineageos installed should be unlockable and acceptable to buy.
      https://download.lineageos.org...
      The best manufacturers in this regards are LG, Motorola and Samsung.

  36. Re:Sorry? What did they say? by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

    Kinda sounds like "You want to buy the shiniest newest device every year after throwing away your old one and you don't care about bootloaders. If you do, you're in the minority that won't affect sales."

  37. Re: Fandroids are fags by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Huawej can suck mx dick now!

  38. Chile has a govt registration for cell phones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Chile has a govt registration for cell phones. If your phone isn't registered, then it can't be used with a local SIM.

    That went into effect last Sept/Oct. I showed up in November with a new Huawei phone that couldn't be used in Chile at all. Filled out the online web form to have my phone added to the Chile Govt DB. The DB was new and few locals knew anything about it. Phones on their network were grandfathered. The site claimed 48 hrs - 3 weeks, but lots of people NEVER got their devices added.

    When travelling to Chile without a roaming plan, the best option is to buy a cheap, local phone on arrival unless you have international roaming that will work where you will be. Most of the best places in Chile have poor to zero coverage, like in the Patagonian national parks.

    Or has the govt DB gotten better since Dec'17?

  39. Right to steal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It prevents criminals from selling stolen phones.

    1. Re:Right to steal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing can prevent a criminal from selling anything to a willing black market buyer. If the buyer actually wants to verify that the phone is legitimate, he or she can look up the IMEI on the blacklist.

  40. That's the same claim AT&T made by davecb · · Score: 1

    They wanted to prevent people plugging modems into the phone lines: 4800 baud half-duplex was available from them and only them, and that's all anyone could ever need, so there!

    --
    davecb@spamcop.net
  41. Re: Who said this isn't a government intervention by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    TRUMP's NSA? Might be you're unacquainted with all the absolutely massive spying on ordinary Americans his predecessor did, nevermind the thoroughly illegal act of using national intelligence assets to spy on his successor's presidential campaign.

  42. no easy-unlock feature means no purchase by keneng · · Score: 1

    I have consistently purchased Google Nexus phones because I can unlock them if they aren't. I also want alternative operating systems not necessarily Android. Ubuntu Touch on my Nexus 5 from the ubports has been a good experience for me lately athough sometimes I do miss all those other apps around in the Google Play Store. I was actually considering to buy a Huawei Android phone for my next purchase because they are feature-full.

    If I cannot unlock my potential phone, that implies I won't be purchasing said phone. I guess I'll be sticking to those phones that are directly supported from Google either Pixel 2 or Pixel 3.

  43. Translation: Stop Bypassing Chinese Spying! by HannethCom · · Score: 1

    We allowed to install custom ROMS til now for less stuttering and better battery life, but Chinese Government wants to spy and custom ROMS don't have the government software.
    We sorry, please use us!

    --
    Microsoft, Apple, Google, Amazon what's the difference? All steal money from devs and control with walled gardens.
  44. What about the software on your microwave? by Brannon · · Score: 1

    Your refrigerator? your car? your pacemaker? Do those manufacturers have to support third-party SW modding? Who draws the line?

    1. Re:What about the software on your microwave? by sinij · · Score: 1

      Support? No, they don't have to. However, them must not take steps to lock me out of using third-party offerings.

    2. Re:What about the software on your microwave? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not all computers need to have the physical capability to support changable software routines. If it has the capability to do so, then the company who manufactures the product must not restrict the user with mechanisms such as technology key locks. If there are such key locks to restrict the changing of the software routines, then it is absolutely necessary that the key should be given to the one who owns the phone - anything less means the manufacturer is the one who controls the user invading the users' rights.

  45. What about your thermostat? oven? microwave? by Brannon · · Score: 1

    There's a CPU in everything--should the manufacturers for every programmable device be required to enable third-party SW on that device? It's easier than you think to cause real physical harm if we let /. Java-monkeys re-write critical pieces of firmware on embedded devices; and it would cost a lot of money and effort to put in physical hardware safeguards to protect the world from the zombie hoard of self-satisfied ass-clowns that hang out on this forum.

    1. Re:What about your thermostat? oven? microwave? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Love this argument. I think I'll apply it on general purpose computers too. The Internet is fragile. All it takes is some lunatic "hacker" (oh no!) to cause a lot of harm. From now on you need to apply for a permit to create your own computer program. Oh, and general purpose computers can't be sold to citizens, by law. And no, it doesn't matter if the computer doesn't have a network interface, since these Hacker People are clever and will add one anyway. This will reduce hacking, piracy and create a strong commercial and industrial Internet platform.

    2. Re:What about your thermostat? oven? microwave? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      should the manufacturers for every programmable device be required to enable third-party SW on that device?

      No, but intentionally making it difficult when the hardware explicitly supports it just to enable a lock-in to your software is not consumer friendly, and ultimately helps contibute to the pollution, 'throw it away' problem.

      Because who is getting updates after 2 years? If you could install a 'supported' 3rd party SW on your phone to extend its life by 2* more years, should you be stopped simply because the manufacturer doesn't want you to 'tinker' and wants you to follow their 2 year upgrade cycle?

      * - If you're lucky, some manufacturers stop releasing updates the day the phone is released, or maybe for 6 months to a year.

  46. This is excellent snark. by Brannon · · Score: 1

    ...because it points out the fundamental problem that no one here is talking about. The fraction of people who care about rooting their phone is statistically insignificant. If there was a market there, then companies would try to fill that void (it's not that hard to make a smartphone nowadays).

    Just like if there was a market for a brick-sized phone with 2 weeks of battery life using replaceable batteries, 3 headphone jacks, no FaceID or fingerprint sensor, 4 different kinds of memory slots, and full circa-2003 Flash support, then somebody would build that phone.

    Instead the hacker crowd talks about "freedom" and "sheeple" when what they really mean is, "please force everyone to subsidize my nerdy little hobby--and please make technology hard to use again so that my existence is justified and normal people are forced to talk to me occasionally."

    1. Re:This is excellent snark. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...because it points out the fundamental problem that no one here is talking about. The fraction of people who care about rooting their phone is statistically insignificant. If there was a market there, then companies would try to fill that void (it's not that hard to make a smartphone nowadays).

      If rooting such a marginal problem, then why put effort into preventing it?

  47. Re: Fandroids are fags by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, all iPhone users need to get more speed on their Facebook so they can emoji and like faster, and make better pictures of themselves with puppy faces. It seems to get even faster the more you bedazzle it with your rainbow studs, glitter, and plastic diamonds. And don't forget your LVE stickers where the apple logo fills in for the missing O.

  48. Re: Who said this isn't a government intervention by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Huawei is practically banned from the US already, why would they care what the government thinks?

  49. DDT ? by bingoUV · · Score: 1

    If you're that worried about it then you should start a campaign to educate people about it

    Was DDT banned due to lots of people voicing their opinions on it ? Or was it banned undemocratically, with a mandate from powers that be ?

    About technical matters, where the populace is not expected to understand the implications of their choice, how are decisions taken in your world ?

    --
    Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
    1. Re:DDT ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Was DDT banned due to lots of people voicing their opinions on it ? Or was it banned undemocratically, with a mandate from powers that be ?

      DDT was banned because it concentrated in apex predators (i.e. Bald Eagles), and gave their eggs weak shells. So to save Bald Eagles, DDT was banned.

      DDT was used in home fumigations to eliminate other pests, such as bedbugs. Other (current) treatments are not nearly as effective. So, in addition to saving the Bald Eagle, we're also preserving bedbugs. Two species saved by banning just one product.

    2. Re: DDT ? by bingoUV · · Score: 1

      Why were the buyers of pesticides not allowed to let "market forces" determine which pesticide to use ? If DDT were truly as bad as it was made out to be, people wouldn't buy it, would they ?

      --
      Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
    3. Re:DDT ? by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Was DDT banned due to lots of people voicing their opinions on it ? Or was it banned undemocratically, with a mandate from powers that be ?

      Actually DDT was banned as a result of the funding and formation of the Environmental Defense Fund that campaigned against DDT, raised awareness of the issue and filed lawsuits to ban it. Nice that you're familiar with that because that really is the route I'm suggesting.

    4. Re:DDT ? by bingoUV · · Score: 1

      The post of yours I replied to, said "vote with their wallets". There was no voting with any wallets in the case of DDT.

      I welcome your change of opinion.

      --
      Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
    5. Re:DDT ? by exomondo · · Score: 1

      The post of yours I replied to, said "vote with their wallets". There was no voting with any wallets in the case of DDT.

      Voting with your wallet is indeed one approach and not opposed to the approach taken with DDT. So, like I said "If you're that worried about it then you should start a campaign to educate people about it and make sure they voice their opinions on why they are making the choices they are." the extension of which, if voting with your wallet itself doesn't work, is to fund and form something analogous to the Environmental Defense Fund to do what I suggested and potentially file lawsuits.

      However I'm fairly sure you're all talk and no action and won't actually follow through with such a thing.

    6. Re: DDT ? by bingoUV · · Score: 1

      Voting with your wallet is indeed one approach and not opposed to the approach taken with DDT

      The "indeed one approach" was the only one mentioned in the post I was replying to. It did not mention that take any approach "not opposed to" voting with your wallets.

      BTW government banning things suo moto is also "one approach" and it is also "not opposed to" "voting with your wallets". Posting on /. is also one approach and this approach is also not opposed to voting with your wallets.

      If you are only arguing against approaches " opposed " to voting with your wallets, you are highly unlikely to ever get any from me ; and somewhat less likely to get anywhere in /.

      --
      Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
    7. Re: DDT ? by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Yes you can do one, the other or both and in whatever order you like...but more likely neither (whining about it on slashdot won't solve it).

    8. Re: DDT ? by bingoUV · · Score: 1

      So you had to change the topic to avoid admitting your idiocy ?

      --
      Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
    9. Re: DDT ? by exomondo · · Score: 1

      You're confused. I don't care which approach you take, but it's irrelevant because you'll take neither.

    10. Re: DDT ? by bingoUV · · Score: 1

      First you are confused about what voting with wallets means. Then you are confused whether you are talking about only approaches opposed to voting with wallets. In this latest instance, you are confused about whether the approach I take is being discussed at all.

      --
      Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
  50. Re: Fandroids are fags by mSparks43 · · Score: 1

    didn't know apple offered a 8 core 5ghz option. might give it a try, where can i buy?

  51. Really, no security at all on that pacemaker? by Brannon · · Score: 1

    Who is liable when somebody rewrites your pacemaker software and kills you? Or burns your house down when they rewrite the software on the microwave? I guarantee the same people on this forum who are insisting on more freedom will be the first people to line up and sue they manufacturer when they cause some real physical damage by modding the device, "but, but, there should have been hardware interlocks preventing me from doing any real damage".

    1. Re:Really, no security at all on that pacemaker? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's exactly right! It's always the same thing: 'I want to be able to modify the device but retain the warranty and right to sue'

      The hardware and software is tightly integrated (at the hardware level we're dealing full SoC designs) so it just isn't feasible to say that you want to be able swap parts in and out and then expect that the company is going to then do an investigation to work out whether a fault was caused by the original device hardware/software or the modified hardware/software you tinkered with. It's just obviously ridiculous to expect them to do that in reality hence the blanket voiding of the warranty.

      In so many devices these days the functionality is software-defined, you can change the software to make it operate outside the design parameters of the hardware (be that a specific component or other components connected to it) so of course device manufacturers don't want you doing that, damaging the device and then demanding a refund.

  52. Re: Who said this isn't a government intervention by imrahilj · · Score: 1

    Because they want to be able to get back into the market in a couple of years?

  53. as many as I have by nten · · Score: 1

    As many years as I care to merge them into the branch for my device and recompile. If I could find a phone that lasted longer than a couple years without some piece of hardware going out I'd care more.

    --
    refactor the law, its bloated, confusing and unmaintainable.
  54. Just while i was starting to look at Huawei by sad_ · · Score: 1

    it's no longer an option now.
    they even have their own GUI upon Android (MUI).
    if i can't flash it and run a standard Android, no thanks

    --
    On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
  55. ....it's all about the Banks and the proposed date by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Need i say more.The Banks want your phones ownership and it's whereabouts for every moment of your live in exchange for holding your phone up to the till in the supermarket.
    Some exchange.
    I am done with Who are We.
    What a sell out bunch you are allowing this to happen.