George R. M. π©πͺπΊπ¦
Jason KoeblerScoop: I obtained the contract Samsung requires independent shops to sign to buy phone repair parts from them.
It requires:
- "Daily" dumps of customer data
- The "immediate destruction" of any phones a shop comes across that has third-party parts
Alastair Temple
Bill, organizer of stuff@jasonkoebler ouch. Unsurprising, I guess, but wow.
Aaron@jasonkoebler "Would a customer bring their phone in to be repaired only to have it destroyed?"
That's the stuff of a dark comedy dystopia right there
Pablonius Monk πΊπ¦@jasonkoebler Perhaps naΓ―ve of us to think these companies were going to just bow to the right-to-repair movement without getting a little something for themselves. SMH
haliphax πΎ@jasonkoebler > People have a right to use third-party parts under the Magnuson Moss Warranty Act, for one thing, and it's hard to square this contact language with that basic consumer right.
It's not hard, it's impossible. The contract is not legally enforceable on its face. More corporate overreach where they believe contract is king.
Wolf480pl@jasonkoebler that's so fucked up.
But also, how are phone repair shops able to collect such data? Do people not.get weirded out when a repair shop asks them for their home address?
Daniel GibsonNo, most people will just accept it, they're probably used to it by now. And also, what choice do they have when all repair shops have to follow this policy...
@Doomed_Daniel @jasonkoebler I mean, I don't rememver ever having a phone repair shop ask me for such information.
Maybe because all the shops I've been to only only third-party parts. Or don't repair Samsung. I don't know.
Maybe because all the shops I've been to only only third-party parts. Or don't repair Samsung. I don't know.
@wolf480pl @jasonkoebler
dunno, I've never been to a phone repair shop, but generally it's not super unusual to be asked for your address, especially when not just buying something somewhere but getting some kind of service that doesn't happen immediately
dunno, I've never been to a phone repair shop, but generally it's not super unusual to be asked for your address, especially when not just buying something somewhere but getting some kind of service that doesn't happen immediately
@jasonkoebler Our first phones were Samsungs. Now @LinuxAndYarn and I do Motorola, but long ago gave up on any hope of actual repair...
Dave/Loebas 
@[email protected] auwtsj.
My next phone wil be definitly a fairphone now. Never liked the bloatware on a samsung phones anyway
John Faithfull ππͺπΊπ΄σ §σ ’σ ³σ £σ ΄σ Ώπ§‘βπ»βπΏ
Koutsie 
@jasonkoebler insanity. we should start restricting companies who destroy working devices π
Hans van Zijst@Jason Koebler Holy shit!
This, I think, should lead to a lawsuit, and LOTS of publicity. People should never buy anything Samsung ever again.
This, I think, should lead to a lawsuit, and LOTS of publicity. People should never buy anything Samsung ever again.
ΡΠ²Π°ΡΡ ΡΠ°ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΠΊ@jasonkoebler thank you. definitely NOT buying any #samsung electronics anymore whenever i have a say in it.
@ΡΠ²Π°ΡΡ ΡΠ°ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΠΊ I bought a Samsung "Smart TV" 12 years ago.
My 2 stepdaughters were happy that it had software onboard to watch YouTube shite. I wasn't too happy because I've learned to be very suspicious.
So I disconnected it from my LAN, it doesn't have to phone home to Samsung or whatever other party. Of course, my stepdaughers thought I was being paranoid.
https://www.techradar.com/news/samsung-smart-tvs-will-soon-have-a-privacy-app-but-your-data-is-still-your-responsibility
My 2 stepdaughters were happy that it had software onboard to watch YouTube shite. I wasn't too happy because I've learned to be very suspicious.
So I disconnected it from my LAN, it doesn't have to phone home to Samsung or whatever other party. Of course, my stepdaughers thought I was being paranoid.
https://www.techradar.com/news/samsung-smart-tvs-will-soon-have-a-privacy-app-but-your-data-is-still-your-responsibility
@hans i have youtube blocked on home network. that was not the point though⦠the audacity of the company requiring user data and destruction of their property is bordering crime, the servicing companies who sign those conditions are accomplices imho.
@ΡΠ²Π°ΡΡ ΡΠ°ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΠΊ Bordering? Nah, this if full-fledged crime, not bordering. The ones who decided on this should be put behind bars!
A Lloyd Flanagan@jasonkoebler The sharing customer data is part for the course in modern commerce (thatβs not an endorsement) but if my phone repair center βdestroyedβ my phone the lawsuit would follow instantly.
Howlin' HobbitI wouldnβt opt for a lawsuit when jamming the pieces up the ass of the destroyer offered more immediate satisfaction.
@howlinhobbit @jasonkoebler I cannot disagree with this approach.
Spring Jo π₯ 
π@jasonkoebler have they learned absolutely nothing from apple?
also, this will immediately be quashed in the EU
Dan GoodinGreat work, Jason.
Klaus Vink Slott@jasonkoebler Gad vide om det er det samme her i Danmark?
Jonathan Kamens 86 47@jasonkoebler seems hella illegal
njsg@jasonkoebler Is "destroy" wording for disassembling (so meaning "render inoperational") or are they requiring damage to the parts too?
I guess when there are third-party components installed Samsung can't be sure their batteries will do the destruction by itself?
Kelson@jasonkoebler Wow, that's f'ed up.
Gilgwath@jasonkoebler what the frick?! It's my phone, I bought that, that's my property and I can do what every I want with it. This is absolutely abysmal. Well, I don't own a Samsung anymore, but still ...
Gustavo Litovsky@jasonkoebler how is destroying someoneβs property legal?
Sieva π΄πποΈπΉ@jasonkoebler A nice thing about a custom ROM: data encrypted and no backdoors, right, @GrapheneOS ? I wasn't worried about this when bringing my phone to a repair shop. βImmediate destructionβ didn't cross my mind, however.
GrapheneOS@Anibyl @jasonkoebler Most alternate mobile operating systems greatly reduce security including the security against data extraction from the device, remote attacks, apps, etc. GrapheneOS does the opposite.
We greatly improve the defenses against that attack vector, but in this case it sounds like users are providing their lock method. Samsung does have working always-enabled encryption but Cellebrite, etc. can bypass it unless the device is Before First Unlock with a strong passphrase.
@Anibyl @jasonkoebler See https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/112462758257739953 in our recent thread about how GrapheneOS and other devices are holding up against this attack vector. Nearly all other alternate operating systems are reducing security, not improving it, so your statement is overly general.
There's no evidence of backdoors in Samsung devices but rather they are simply a lot easier to exploit than GrapheneOS. They lack proper alternate OS support so another OS would be missing important security features.
GrapheneOS (@[email protected])
Attached: 2 images Cellebrite's list of capabilities provided to customers in April 2024 shows they can successfully exploit every non-GrapheneOS Android device brand both BFU and AFU, but not GrapheneOS if patch level is past late 2022. It shows only Pixels stop brute force via the secure element.
@GrapheneOS @jasonkoebler Thanks for correcting me!
VisualPlugin@jasonkoebler: 'immediate destruction' is stretching it.
What'll happen is that the third-party parts get taken out and sent back to the distributor.
And then the service shop orders a 'compilant' replacement and charges the customer for it.
No destruction involved.
mmu_man@jasonkoebler What theβ¦
tomi
Jim Killock@jasonkoebler Really shocking
Michael@jasonkoebler Samsung demand destruction of private property? What the actual hell?
Pavel Machek@jasonkoebler How is it legal to destroy customer's hardware?
gom@jasonkoebler Is this contract for the US legal system or is it for entities within the EU?
Asking for moody regulators..
Asking for moody regulators..
StonAlchemist@jasonkoebler but no one will read this and care about.
If it was Apple a shitstorm will start immediately
If it was Apple a shitstorm will start immediately
kianryan βοΈππ³οΈβπ
U.Lancier@jasonkoebler a contract of that kind would be illegal in most countries I can think of. To demand tampering with the private property and disclosure of private information of a 3rd party is at least void, if not considered to be incitement.
Do you know where that contract is used?
I called a repair shop near me which works officially with Samsung to confirm the sentiment and facts.
Sometimes, they have a customer who brings a phone with third-party hardware.
That customer would know that DISASSEMBLY, NOT DESTRUCTION is how things go. And then new parts are bought to replace it at a fee. They know what they're getting into.
The shop was also sceptical that I even had the contract open in the first place - it was never meant for public release.
sunflowerinrain@jasonkoebler My current phone is a Samsung, and I already regretted it. No more. Next one will be Fairphone or similar.
Dr Ro Smith
Kevin Karhan 
@jasonkoebler pretty shure this shite is so illegal in #Germany that @Bundesverband, @bsi and @bmdv would tell #Samsung to get their asses handed in court...
Gord@jasonkoebler Those rat bastards