Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Would a USB-C port that cannot connect to anything but Apple's approved hardware even comply with the legislation? I thought the whole point was interoperability, particularly in term of chargers. If Apple sticks a port that looks like a USB-C port but that doesn't behave like a USB-C port, surely it won't be treated as a USB-C port?


I don't think anyone is talking about that. Currently you can use any USB-C or USB-A charging brick to charge your phone. And even non-certified Lightning cables charge the phone.

Even if they limit it "the same as lightning", charging will be just fine. The EU rulings seem to be exclusively about charging: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2022...


Considering that charging is the most dangerous thing a cable can do, Apple's motives for this sort of restrictions can be boiled down to the usual monopolistic approach.


And yet... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juice_jacking

Specifically, note "Mactans"

https://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/07/31/resear...

"As a proof of concept, the three researchers created a malicious version of an iOS Facebook app that also includes a Trojan that runs in the background, capable of taking screenshots, simulating button touches, and sending data to a remote server."


That was done by exploiting developer mode, and was fixed by asking the user before any data transmission is enabled. The only thing that is allowed "blindly", and hence the most dangerous, is charging. No need for any racketeeri-- sorry, Apple-controlled whitelist.


How is it fixed when a significant percentage of the customer base will end up clicking yes, some due to ignorance, some by pure error? This isn't how security works.


Moving goalposts will not change the fact that Apple whitelisting this or that device does nothing beyond helping their bank balance.


Considering that charging is the most dangerous thing a cable can do

You must not have been around for the era when data exfiltration via charging cables and bricks was a thing.

Buy a charging cable from some random Chinese reseller on Amazon, and bingo — data in your phones goes back to the PRC.

I still have about five little black USB security dongles in my drawer from this era. They only allowed the charging pins to connect to the phone or computer. The data lines are physically disconnected. We used to call them "charging condoms."


MFi is not about the cable. It's about authenticating the accessory. I see it as some kind of DRM, because you can't reverse-engineer the protocol and connect your own accessory.

I like Android's AOAP better for this reason.


See the case of fried Nintendo Switches a few years ago to see how messy the USB-C power delivery scene is.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: