Samsung disables customer phones remotely, holds data hostage until Mexican government stepped in (odysee.com)

submitted 2 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

6 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 6 comments

sorted by: hot top new old

[-] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago

My bet is on stolen phones. Is it stolen phones?

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

The ability to lock stolen phones should be under the control of its owner. Keeping it under OEM is just asking for that capability to be abused and misused against the wishes of the owner.

[-] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago

How do you keep that only to the owner without proprietary software Should only the owner have a private key? And how would it be set to be the correct one in the first place?

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

I don't understand the requirement for a proprietary software for this. Meanwhile, boot chain verification exists already. And there is no reason why it can't be under the control of the user - with a user-supplied private key.

[-] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago

Could you explain? I dont understant very well, from what I thought free software should be able to be replaced by anything

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

Free software should be able to be replaced by anything - by the owner. There is no technical reason the device can't still be locked to prevent modification by someone else. There are already free software that allows you (the owner) to remotely screen-lock the device.

this post was submitted on 25 Oct 2023

3 points (100.0% liked)

Stallman Was Right

1538 readers

1 users here now

Nobody listens to him. But he was right all along.

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]