California
bill directs mobile hardware makers to include a way to disable stolen
communications devices. Will privacy concerns be addressed?
In addition, the rationale for putting kill switches in phones also applies to cars, the theft of which, according to the FBI, cost $4.3 billion in losses nationwide in 2011. Though that's far less than the $30 billion in estimated US mobile phone losses during 2012, this particular form of digital restriction management (DRM) seems destined to spread as more devices get connected to the Internet.
California State Senator Mark Leno on Friday introduced a
bill that, if passed, will require makers of mobile communications
devices sold in the state after Jan. 1, 2015 to include technology that
can render such devices inoperable when lost or stolen.
The mandated technology, commonly referred to as a "kill
switch," may be implemented in software or hardware, but must be able to
survive a factory reset. To comply, companies might have to do
additional engineering work on their mobile devices -- factory resets
typically erase all data by reformatting storage media and might not be
set up to handle exceptions. The specified fine for the absence of a
kill switch ranges from $500 to $2,500 per violation.
The bill
stipulates that the physical action necessary to disable the kill
switch may only be taken by the rightful owner of the device or a person
designated by the owner; the mobile carrier may not do so, but
presumably could with the owner's permission. The mobile carrier also
may not encourage the disabling of the kill switch.
The kill switch must "render inoperable" the following
features: "the ability to use the device for voice communications and
the ability to connect to the Internet, including the ability to access
and use mobile software applications commonly known as 'apps.'"
[Protect yourself against phone thieves. Read 10 Defenses Against Smartphone Theft.]
This wording leaves some ambiguity: A PIN-protected lock
screen appears to meet the bill's requirements because the bill limits
access and use but does not call for the shutdown of software (the
termination of processes). Many apps continue to run in the background
and access the Internet even when they're not being used by the device
owner.
At the same time, the bill's unqualified voice
communications cutoff requirement appears to conflict with the Federal
Communications Commission's rule that wireless phones must be capable of
making 911 calls regardless of whether the caller has a mobile service
plan.

Photo courtesy of West Midlands Police (Flickr).
Leno and San Francisco district attorney George Gascón
announced their intent to propose a kill switch requirement last
December, citing an "alarming rate" of mobile phone thefts nationwide.
They cite FCC figures indicating that smartphone thefts account for 30%
to 40% of all robberies nationwide. In San Francisco, that figure is
said to be more than 50%.
Smartphone theft and the public safety issues that
accompany it have galvanized lawmakers and law enforcement officials
around the country. Last summer, Gascón joined New York State attorney
general Eric Schneiderman to launch Secure Our Smartphones (SOS), a
nationwide initiative to encourage phone makers to integrate anti-theft
technology. And last month US Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) said she
intends to introduce similar federal legislation in the coming weeks.
Mobile carriers have rejected calls for a kill switch. CTIA, a trade group for the wireless industry, says it would be too easy for hackers to forge kill switch commands,
thereby shutting down mobile communication services for authorities,
emergency responders, or other officials. Gascon, however, reportedly
has email evidence that mobile carriers are resisting the call for kill
switches to preserve the billions of dollars they make annually from
selling theft insurance to their customers.
Leno's bill states that, according to industry
publications, "the four largest providers of commercial mobile radio
services made an estimated $7.8 billion dollars from theft and loss
insurance products in 2013."
Carrier motives aside, a government-mandated anti-theft regime raises
provocative questions about the limits of property ownership and
privacy. In order to be effective, this kill switch could not be easily
disabled by switching a device off or into airplane mode. As a
consequence, any person carrying an always-on device becomes always
trackable.In addition, the rationale for putting kill switches in phones also applies to cars, the theft of which, according to the FBI, cost $4.3 billion in losses nationwide in 2011. Though that's far less than the $30 billion in estimated US mobile phone losses during 2012, this particular form of digital restriction management (DRM) seems destined to spread as more devices get connected to the Internet.
0 comments:
Post a Comment