They've finally done it. The federal government has finally proposed a legal requirement of kill switches in devices...


http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-57618891-94/senators-propose-smartphone-antitheft-kill-switch-bill/

Senators propose smartphone antitheft 'kill switch' bill
news.cnet.com

On the heels of proposed California legislation, federal lawmakers also get on board with a bill requiring security features on all cell phones. Read this article by Dara Kerr on CNET News.

>2014
>not having a killswitch on all electronics that store data

lol newfig

>>2 Magnets also work.

Remotely, too.

>>2 Just because they haven't proposed it in laptops and desktops yet, doesn't mean that they won't. Remember, the US legal system is based on something called "precedent". They'd move the technology to laptops next, under the same premise. Then they'd add it to desktops and servers on the grounds of aiding law enforcement or copyright enforcement.

Also, keep in mind that a kill switch in phones can harm journalists, emergency calls, peaceful protesters, and the like.

Think before you simply dismiss opinions.



>>3 Actually, it takes a really strong (expensive) magnet to affect electronics, particularly phones, as they use flash memory instead of hard drives.

>>4 But journalists, peaceful protesters, and the like could really benefit from kill switches as well.
That's all I'm saying here.
If you back up data of any kind and you don't have a kill switch, I think you're just kind of not paranoid enough.
Ill prepared, eben.

>>5 I think the risks are pretty severe here. They might even outweigh the possible benefits.

I also don't understand why it has to be a legal requirement. If you want a device that has this kill switch capability, aren't there already options out there? I guess what I'm trying to say is, why make it so all phones have to have a kill switch, when not everyone wants a phone with a kill switch in it?

>>7 I don't disagree with you.
I think that making it a legal requirement is wrong and I think that someone other than the owner of the device having any power over the kill switch is wrong.

The government just sucks.

the president right now is notheing but a dump ass and forter more a kill swich is easily disabeld if bilt in to hardware in a software is a difrent story so that is something to think about

sorry for spelling

>>10 So, you can easily disable the TPM on your Win8 MOBO, then?

Maybe not?

This is hilarious. A mandatory anti-theft measure is just fucking golden. This is the worst ruse I've ever seen. They should just man up and say they're control freaks instead of using some pitiful excuse.

>>12 I can't tell if you're really really stupid or not

>>13 He seems to have a valid point, at least as I read it.

If they can remotely wipe all the data off of your phone, isn't that exerting control on you?

I can't believe no one has said this yet. But does anyone else realize the serious issue here: a kill switch, yes. But if the Government is pushing for this, the that means they want some way to cut off communications and such from everyone, the United States is getting a bit corrupt all because Congress has grown fat, lazy and greedy. If they put the kill switches into effect, then the Government has a way to cripple the technology of life and stuff like that.

>>15
>implying they can't just shut off all communications anyways.

Well I guess it does stop identity theft, although you really should look after your phone better with all the information that's on it

To quote Spaceballs at the end of the movie: "Well shit... there goes the planet..."

>>16 Or food, water, electricity, information, etc.

They've got us by the balls, frankly.

Although, it is odd they are pushing for this to be a legal requirement. I know they have something else in mind, but given the power they already have I can't quite figure it out.

>>19 Exactly.

To be honest, I think this is probably a distraction because they already have the power to disarm us all together.

>>20 Oh, maybe us banding together and striking this bill down will be a victory for the people against the government. After all, nothing keeps your people in check like false security. If they think they've got power over you, they won't actively protect what they don't think needs protecting.

it should be up to the people and what they want for their security.

>>20
They have the potential power to do so. You have to realize. Once they do something to catch the attention of those that are unaware of the threat the government poses, it's game over for them. That's why they just don't flat out seize everything else, because on top of the estimated two-million citizens who are ready to fight, the more are sure to jump on during such a crisis. And may I remind you, just the two-million is more the entire US armed forces and police combined, not to mention the drop in manpower they'll have when those unwilling to fight the American Citizens go AWOL.

>>23 You overestimate the banding power of people. They will not band together to fight the government. They will gather all the food, water, and power they can and fuck right off to an isolated shelter. They will kill each other.

Plus, the government has drones.

so? how dose this really affect anyone to badly,why I sthis a big deal?

>>25
It's a big deal because other groups will be able to instantly delete all of your information from your phone.

>>26 He's right. If people can steal your credit card and stuff electronically, I'm sure they can find a way to throw the kill switch on your phone.

Honestly, with enough hackers around, this probably isn't a good idea to have in any device.

Then probably a good idea to get a degree in hacking!

>>28 >>29 While you are getting your degree in hacking, maybe you can learn to spoof your IP so you don't look like a fucking fool talking to yourself.

>degree in hacking

My god.