eevBLAB 132 - Insta360 Ace Pro 2 Camera RANSOMWARE - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 01:12:37 am
content: The Insta360 Ace Pro 2 action camera comes with Ransomware out of the box. You MUST give them all your private data to register the camera through the app or it won't work. I'm sick of this crap, don't buy Insta360 or DJI products. And change your profile picture to a Clippy.DJI Pocket 2 Ransomware:Louis Rossmann Clippy:

author: John B
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 03:10:01 am
content: Let us know what the businesses say when you give feedback too, I do feel sympathy when they are caught in the middle and are perhaps unaware of the pitfalls of their product, but this crap has to be fought at every level.I think you can even make a case with the guidelines laid out by the ACCC. Obviously being a government entity, they are very far behind when it comes to the technological landscape, so perhaps there's room to expand their guidelines too to include soft-locks and corpo-ransomware as specific breaches of consumer law.

author: wilfred
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 05:13:43 am
content: There is only one effective way to push back on this and that is to not buy it.I don't buy action cameras so I don't know if they all do it and refusing to purchase is to effectively lock yourself out of the market.I bought a cheap smart watch (it wasn't all that smart) out of a bargain clearance sale at K-mart for $10. I really only wanted the band which looked nice. So I didn't know anything about it. But I was shocked to find there was no way to even set the time without downloading an app and connecting it to a smartphone.Aside from never getting around to having social media accounts (except youtube) 25+ years ago I bought a $1 disk to install a dial-up internet and email account. I never used it but I did create a dummy email account that I use for creating other accounts just so I can get the return authentication email. And I have an old smartphone that I use to avoid loading my real phone with junk.I'm not paranoid about data privacy but I don't have to make it easy.Not to want to sound snarky but how after having prior experience with this does one do it again? That was the question on my mind throughout. Especially someone who is not a regular consumer ignorant of technology. That's the key question. If a tech savvy person can buy it what chance is there for an unsophisticated consumer?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 05:57:18 am
content: Quote from: John B on August 15, 2025, 03:10:01 amIt's Amazon, so there will be no feedback.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 06:01:47 am
content: Quote from: wilfred on August 15, 2025, 05:13:43 amHuh? This is an entirely different company.That's like asking why if Bosch screwed you over on your dishwasher, why buy another dishwasher from Miele?Or if Tesla screwed you over on your EV, why buy a Hyundai EV?None of the reviews I saw even mentioned this issue, it's not about being "tech savvy".Heck, even Louis Rossmann got caught out with DJI several years after i made my video exposing this.

author: Helix70
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 08:38:06 am
content: Just curious, can you make up fake data for the registration? Maybe we all just need a fake persona that we use to use for these purposes.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 08:43:06 am
content: Quote from: Helix70 on August 15, 2025, 08:38:06 amOf course, but that doesn't send them a message.

author: wilfred
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 10:07:44 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on August 15, 2025, 06:01:47 amYes that is true but it wasn't my point. There have been a growing concern about companies encroaching on a buyers right to own and use their stuff without some insidious need to register it, tie it to a remote server or cloud service that can just stop. This is just one aspect of that.You don't want to focus on too fine a point when consumer rights is a much broader issue. I watch LR too.

author: golden_labels
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 10:19:33 am
content: Quote from: Helix70 on August 15, 2025, 08:38:06 amYou can’t reasonably fake the data. You can fake your name or address, but nobody(1)cares about such stuff. It is with almost no value. The data they care about is the same as with Alphabet and majority of modern personal data market: ephemeral proxy variables or clicking “I agree” on the rights waiver. Oversimplified understanding of privacy and data is the tragedy for any attempt to push back. Because to most people privacy violations either don’t look like ones, or can be easily shrugged off with “it’s not done in private anyway” or “it is not data.”So don’t think that by calling yourself Tux Kovalsky living in 0th Penguin Avenue, Antarctic is protecting you or is bringing any change.(The above touches only the privacy aspect; of course with this camera other issues are probably more important!)(1)Except those wishing to commit identity theft, but that is unlikely here and relatively rare in general.

author: AndyC_772
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2025, 11:57:42 am
content: A while ago I bought a wi-fi base station that had a related issue. The user can configure it all locally, right up until the point at which it detects it has internet access, at which point the local UI is locked out and it absolutely insists on being remotely controlled using a Netgear account.I sent it straight back and explained why; I like to hope that even if Netgear themselves don't care about the end user experience, their resellers can and will complain about the costs involved in refunding orders.I gave the unit a 2 star review on the reseller's site, which to their credit they did publish.These days I always download the full manual for any product I'm thinking of buying, and check for this sort of crap first. It's a shame I have to bother, and an even greater shame that most people don't.

author: suzhiming
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2025, 01:21:31 am
content: Don't buy these electronic junk, but they are hard to distinguish.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 16, 2025, 02:41:36 am
content: Quote from: golden_labels on August 15, 2025, 10:19:33 amThat's why I sent it back.

author: jh15
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2025, 03:08:09 am
content: I don't know about the latest models and victims, but my 8+ year Tesla S, I have full service manual pictures and procedures online, could d/l if needed.A few weeks ago, i was given notice that the 12 volt battery, being 8 years old, they l not update the latest software until replaced.The original lead-acid agm was from a reputable server back up system battery manufacturer.While being replaced in my driveway, the service tech was saying new 12 volt batteries are failing left and right, and expect to be lucky to replace in 3 years.Should have added old one to my ham radio and backup stuff, but it would not be good for WAF.

author: rteodor
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2025, 05:10:06 am
content: Quote from: Helix70 on August 15, 2025, 08:38:06 amhttps://datafakegenerator.com/generador.phpIf enough people do then its "breaking the milk". But then the is the danger that there would be a powerful lobby to make registrations more strict with biometrics and id and "trusted computing" (trusted by corporations that is). As its already the case with online banking.

author: golden_labels
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2025, 10:07:37 am
content: Quote from: rteodor on August 16, 2025, 05:10:06 amThere is no reason for anybody pushing for that, becauseof what I wrote above. Your “official data” offers close to no value.Quote from: rteodor on August 16, 2025, 05:10:06 amRomania has some interesting banks! What you just wrote indicates, that banks beg the legislature to be regulated and required to employ procedures hurting their income.Stronger identity checks are lobbied for mostly by the state: tax offices, law enforcement, and intelligence agencies. To some degree also by unrelated to business individuals or groups “aiming to protect society.” The banks, if expressing any interest at all, are either opposing such regulations or are forced to plead for them by another existing law.The bank has no interest in your state-issued identity data, other than what is needed to know who they sign an agreement with. This is hardly an extravagant requirement, given the risk they take and what kind of services they offer.

author: rteodor
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2025, 12:02:41 pm
content: I had a TP-Link router that needed a f-king app to be able to set it up while the older ones (had 2) ran just fine without that crap. I bricked and tossed the damn thing because the return period expired. Does this qualify me for a clippy ?Quote from: golden_labels on August 16, 2025, 10:07:37 amOf course banks dont't care more than its absolutedly needed. They did not care back when authentication was based on matching together two pieces of a broken stick and they would'n care today as long as it works. But reality, you know... why banking apps refuse to run on jailbroken smartphones ?Why is a smartphone required more and more often to do this shoddy registrations ? Why all large stores want an freaking app in my phone (enticing it with discounts) or at least a phone number ?So aren't these "static id" data used as a proxy to get to more juicy informations to exploit one's vulnerabilities ?Quote from: golden_labelsYeah but if its not faked it gets used. So it has to be fake. That is my inderstanding so far. I think I'll get back under my rock now.

author: Brumby
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 17, 2025, 12:10:27 am
content: Quote from: wilfred on August 15, 2025, 10:07:44 amSo, whatwasyour point?

author: John B
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 17, 2025, 02:27:21 am
content: This is going to be an ongoing whack a mole game with companies finding new and novel ways to implement these things, so there's no point throwing shade on the customers. People are necessarily going to be screwed over in this process before knowledge spreads.

author: wilfred
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 17, 2025, 05:08:06 am
content: Quote from: Brumby on August 17, 2025, 12:10:27 amThis which you cut out."Yes that is true but it wasn't my point. There have been a growing concern about companies encroaching on a buyers right to own and use their stuff without some insidious need to register it, tie it to a remote server or cloud service that can just stop. This is just one aspect of that.You don't want to focus on too fine a point when consumer rights is a much broader issue. I watch LR too."

author: BrianHG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 17, 2025, 05:48:32 pm
content: Quote from: Psi on August 17, 2025, 03:05:37 amYup, 'Defective.' is now my new return product reason why word...Also, why do you need a cell phone and internet connection for these products?What if you do not have a modern enough cell phone to install their app?

author: BrianHG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 17, 2025, 07:51:13 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on August 15, 2025, 08:43:06 amIn eevblog video 132 - "in App Store or Google Play'....This almost always means you will not be able to fake your data unless you have a separate cell phone with a phony cell plan and phony cell phone number. The software will most likely demand access to your phone's ID and location to work.

author: Deodand2014
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 17, 2025, 09:00:24 pm
content: I picked up a radio (OXX Classic 600) recently at a flea market, one of it's features is the ability to pick up internet radio, but it could only be done by registering to a specific website, which apparently shut down in 2021. Thankfully the free to air broadcast features are not locked out, otherwise it would have been eWaste.

author: Brumby
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 17, 2025, 11:44:21 pm
content: Quote from: wilfred on August 17, 2025, 05:08:06 amOk then, not editing out the fluff..... I will rephrase my question:Since you are critical of what Dave has done here, what would you have had Dave do differently?You didn't make that clear.

author: wilfred
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2025, 12:19:39 am
content: Quote from: Brumby on August 17, 2025, 11:44:21 pmWell my post goes on with this"Not to want to sound snarky but how after having prior experience with this does one do it again? That was the question on my mind throughout. Especially someone who is not a regular consumer ignorant of technology. That's the key question. If a tech savvy person can buy it what chance is there for an unsophisticated consumer?"I'm specifically trying to not be critical of Dave. And I generally don't like forum threads where individuals carry on a private debate in public.Knowing others read forum posts even though they may not directly participate I was introducing a broader concept of the issue than just a single company and it's behavior. Irritating as that may be to be taken by surprise by such an outcome. It is nowadays not such an isolated incident that technically sophisticated consumers can reasonably be expected to be on the outlook for it. And especially if it has happened to them prior. So it then prompts the question how can a technically unsophisticated consumer be expected to navigate the insidious encroachment of such restrictions to ones free use of the product without also giving up personal data and possible future loss of function.Louis Rossman advocates on the broader issue even when he uses topical examples to advance his case. If I were to be critical of Dave it would be that ranting on isolated issues may make him feel better (or perhaps not) but he has a platform to bring things into context. If unsophisticated consumers are to understand what effective response they can pursue to push back then they will need to have the dots joined for them to form the bigger picture.So in the interests of what I thought was a more useful discussion I put my thoughts out there and if others wanted to they could expand with their own points.I thought my post was perfectly comprehensible. And this is why I generally don't like public forum debate such as you and I are having about the post I made. To the broader forum audience in this thread it isn't of interest. No-one regards Dave as a sensitive snowflake unable to take up a defense of his own position. It is not entirely clear to me if you choose to pick apart my post because you do, or you were seeking to cast him in that light. Dave made a response that didn't seek to expand the discussion and it will eventually fade out. Many forum discussions I see here ramble wildly on all manner of tangents as a dwindling number of participants debate finer and finer esoteric points and eventually a small number are left having disenfranchised all others. I absolutely don't want to be one of those people.

author: Brumby
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 18, 2025, 02:28:51 am
content: That's a lot of words.While I won't dissent with anything said, that still didn'tdirectlyanswer my question. I can only infer - so let's do that...Quote from: wilfred on August 18, 2025, 12:19:39 amThere is a clear need to define EXACTLY what "it" is referencing. Dave took it as a reference to purchasing the Insta360, whereas you appear to be referring to ANY tech purchase. This is a detail that would have been better if spelled out clearly - which it wasn't.But, more importantly, Dave explicitly stated that he had only experienced this rubbish with the DJI unit - that the GoPro didn't have any such restrictions. So, out of a sample of two, one did things the way (some of us) have grown up with while the other added unnecessary restrictions. To me, that would have one's expectationsleantowards something - that doesn't NEED connection/registration/etc. to function - just working out of the box. As such, it is entirely logical that Dave's discovery resulted in the reaction he has shared.QuoteSo (in contributing to an answer to my question) it seems you would have expected Dave to have researched the subject before making the purchase, thus avoiding disappointment.QuoteThat is a fair statement, but since it only happened once before, I'm not going to harangue Dave about it - this time. Certainly, he hasnowestablished a trend in this product market that will, no doubt, feature in future product encounters.QuoteExactly!In my opinion, by Dave being 'stung' on camera, with his reaction for all to see, he will have made a far greater impact than just trawling through pages and pages of T&Cs. Even those of us who can stomach that sort of thing could lose focus. That would be a much smaller audience reached than this video.QuoteLet me stop you there. Louis does Louis. Dave does Dave. Having different takes on a common subject is how a wider audience is informed and, hopefully, invested in action.QuoteI completely agree, however, there are a lot of dots in a lot of areas to cover. This is where Louis Rossmann is shining bright. He has his Consumer Rights Wiki which goes into great detail on a wide range of subjects - including Ransomeware. It's well worth checking outConsumer Rights WikiHe also has a "call to arms" as it were encouraging people to change their profile picture to a Clippy.Dave spendsthe last thirdof his video solely on what Louis is already doing.QuoteI'm not interested inad hominemat all. I'm only interested in the main subject matter and if I see that being skewed, then I am motivated to address it. Dave is big enough to look after himself and I'm not in the business of defending him. He sometimes does things that I'm not a fan of or I find curious, but that's just my opinion and is often not worth sharing.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 18, 2025, 04:11:33 am
content: Quote from: wilfred on August 17, 2025, 05:08:06 amI'm with Brumby, what is your point? There doesn't seem to be a point there.My video is literally fighting back against this practice, so

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 18, 2025, 04:18:22 am
content: Quote from: wilfred on August 18, 2025, 12:19:39 amLOL, you are (in)famous for taking issue with almost everything I do or so.QuoteAgain I'm with Brumby here, what more did you expect me to do?I even mentioned and linked to Louis' video.I did a video showing the true out of box experience and exposing what Insta360 are doing here, something which I don't think anyone else on Youtube has done.Do you want song and dance girls?Again, tell me specifically what you think I should have said or done?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 18, 2025, 04:25:52 am
content: FYI, Insta360's response:

author: golden_labels
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2025, 04:42:53 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on August 18, 2025, 04:25:52 amPR bullshit that literally hurts my brain with being illogical.

author: John B
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2025, 04:49:37 am
content: I would respect it more if they just posted a GIF of that guy from South Park rubbing his nipples.

author: thm_w
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2025, 08:51:33 pm
content: Quote from: golden_labels on August 18, 2025, 04:42:53 amThere is a grain of truth to it. If you receive a clone DJI camera and try to register it with DJI, presumably, it would fail.Whether this is actually an issue these days, no idea. There seem to be less clones now and more just alternate competing brands popping up, that will still clone the camera shape/design but clearly put their own name on it.

author: themadhippy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2025, 09:27:35 pm
content: Loada bollox, plenty of ways to prove if something is genuine without the need of an app.

author: thm_w
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2025, 09:31:48 pm
content: Quote from: themadhippy on August 18, 2025, 09:27:35 pmYou'd be entering your details to register the camera regardless of if it was an app or not, so not sure what your point is, unless its purely "anti-app". Which I get, they could make it more clear on the box.

author: themadhippy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2025, 09:34:31 pm
content: Quotewhos on about registering,the claim is its to prove its genuine

author: thm_w
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2025, 09:40:18 pm
content: Quote from: themadhippy on August 18, 2025, 09:34:31 pmBecause to prove its genuine the serial number would be marked as activated once someone has bought it, otherwise a clone would just use the same serial number for all of their devices. Maybe some kind of challenge response code could work but I've never seen anyone do that.The app also means the user is forced to upgrade the camera firmware (which I'm sure people will complain about), but ultimately means less returns for FW issues.

author: Bud
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2025, 09:48:53 pm
content: "And if it is not genuine, we will brick it."

author: rteodor
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2025, 10:48:42 pm
content: Quote from: Bud on August 18, 2025, 09:48:53 pm"And ifit is not genuine,future subscription is not paid we will brick it."

author: kite31
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2025, 11:58:47 pm
content: What private data do they want?Having been on the internet since the early 90s, I assume the following is all known about me to anyone who delves:NameCurrent address (and some former)At least one of my e-mail addresses, most likely the one I used from my old companyPhone (a unique identifier since 2000)Birth date (despite falsifying that since the early 2000s)Every time I buy something on line all but the DoB will be disclosed. Any other question, I lie.I have various other protections but for the moment, why should I worry too much about that which is assumed already available to a bad actor? As for marketing, reputable companies have an unsubscribe while for the rest my spam filter more than earns its keep every day.Subscription models are something I am happy to be irritated about, and DJI's excuses are obviously paltry but do they really require any true answers to their query at all? You can delete the app after registration and I have two options for protection against data harvesting while the app exists.

author: BrianHG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2025, 12:22:33 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on August 18, 2025, 04:25:52 amIf the camera wasn't genuine, then why-TF would a fake competitor's product request to download a third party app designed specifically for a the Insta360's camera brand?How in the world does Insta360's response may any sense at all?

author: thm_w
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2025, 12:55:31 am
content: Quote from: BrianHG on August 19, 2025, 12:22:33 amThis is no different than saying: why do I a legitimate windows license owner have to enter a license key and register when a counterfeit copy can just be used without registration? I'm not agreeing with the practice, but this is a basic licensing/activation process.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 19, 2025, 01:02:41 am
content: Quote from: BrianHG on August 19, 2025, 12:22:33 amIt doesn't, because they are lying.The real reason is they want to harvest your data.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 19, 2025, 01:06:13 am
content: Quote from: kite31 on August 18, 2025, 11:58:47 pmIt's people with views like this that they rely on to normalise this process so everyone just accepts it.The only way to beat this is to send them a message by returning the product as faulty. Just inputting fake data just normalises the process.

author: kite31
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2025, 04:03:59 am
content: You have not explained why it is a virtue to conceal information already available, repeated with every purchase. The "lie extras" are irrelevant.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 19, 2025, 04:16:59 am
content: Quote from: kite31 on August 19, 2025, 04:03:59 amDo you want to have to register every product before you use? Is this the world you want? If so, why?With a camera I just want to take out the box and record video to the SD card, nothing more.What if every toaster made you register before using it? Every fridge? Every appliance?

author: golden_labels
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2025, 05:12:29 am
content: Quote from: thm_w on August 18, 2025, 08:51:33 pmNow explain, why would a fake device force registration.The Windows exampleis not giving any answer, because in that case it’s still Windows that is being distributed. It’s an unlicensed distribution, but it’s still the same “item.” In the same domain, a more accurate parallel would be arguing, that Windows requires creating an on-line account to prevent people from using ReactOS disguised as Windows.Quote from: kite31 on August 18, 2025, 11:58:47 pmA spot-on example of what I meantwriting in the earlier post:“Oversimplified understanding of privacy and data is the tragedy for any attempt to push back. Because to most people privacy violations either don’t look like ones, or can be easily shrugged off with ‘it’s not done in private anyway’ or ‘it is not data.’”

author: kite31
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2025, 05:16:45 am
content: I think my point was missed so I shall try to explain more clearly.If I were to disclose things I won't for privacy reasons, you might think me paranoid rather than slack. The following might clarify a little anyway.I never register appliances because consumer law protects me, as I know from experience.I research products on the internet and by reading manuals prior to purchase, so I know the context in which to choose.I purchase apps and refuse subscriptions. In the app store I always go straight to the "Data collected" section before reading further about it. I have a further protections against potentially intrusive apps but that is unimportant right now. I do not use clouds but inter-machine sync or a well-protected private server where I need that.I described the manufacturer's excuses above as paltry. I could have used a stronger term, yet my question remains because risk management involves protecting things worth protecting while recognising what has already been captured, or can be afforded.If I had an interest in that camera (I don't) then I would research further to determine what information was actually required, whether the connection was one-off, and then decide. If necessary I could deal with it in a sandbox/quarantine but I would have to be highly motivated to buy with no alternatives before going to that trouble.I hope I have made myself clearer.

author: kite31
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2025, 05:26:17 am
content: Quote from: golden_labels on August 19, 2025, 05:12:29 amAn oversimplified understanding of privacy and data is exactly what I am pushing back against. Risk management includes not jumping at shadows, knowing where is the main game.You have in your sig a reference to NIST on passwords, wherein it decries requiring unnecessary password changes. Exactly right, and something I knew decades ago when I was not bothering to change my outstanding, non-leaked, password despite "advice" from a bank. Assess the actual threat.

author: thm_w
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2025, 11:07:00 pm
content: Quote from: golden_labels on August 19, 2025, 05:12:29 amWe went over that, it wouldn't, unless you try to use DJI app or software on it.QuoteThe clone can be the same physical item produced on ghost shift, or contain the same processor running the same code, or be an entirely different product design, I'm not sure why it matters. Obviously the main reason they want a registration is probably sales tracking and marketing, but there are clearly other possible reasons (simplify warranty, counterfeiting, stolen property, recall notices, etc.).

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 19, 2025, 11:51:30 pm
content: Quote from: thm_w on August 19, 2025, 11:07:00 pmWhich should be the choice of the customer if they want to register for that.There is no excuse for crippling the product out of the box and forcing registration.

author: golden_labels
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 20, 2025, 06:14:32 am
content: Quote from: thm_w on August 19, 2025, 11:07:00 pmSo, we are moving somewhere! \ö/I take the“(o)bviously the main reason they want a registration is probably sales tracking and marketing”part as a sign, that you no longer try to say their reply was logical or anything more than PR manipulation. Makes me feel I’m free from the obligation to respond to “why it matters” question.The only thing remaining are these “other possible reasons.” None of which validates forcing anybody either to register or to run any app. Some are still to the benefit of the company, not the buyer. Like “simplifying” warranty. In scare quotes; if deployed this way, “simplifying” is a nicer sounding synonym for “constraining.” Proper customer-faced simplifying is when the buyer may choose the method simplest to them, not to the vendor. Some other examples may or may not be beneficial to the customer, but it’s up to the buyer to decide. Not to be forced upon anybody and then rationalized with the good, old “it’s for their own good.”Using your own examples:Counterfeiting: if somebody is worried their device may be counterfeit, it’s their decision to check that. It also doesn’t require installing any apps or revealing any data. While not necessary or suitable for the entire population, the baseline procedure is sending 8 words to a plain web form on a hidden service, and receiving a “yes” or “no” answer. This has downsides and could be greatly improved, but I just want to show how far from that baseline DJI is.It’s also important to note, that in 21st century the problem should not be existent. Theearliest known deciphered written recordshows us that accounting is older than 5,200 years. The only reason the issue of fake goods exist is unwillingness of business to reveal their connections or take the additional burden.Stolen property: it’s up to the customer to enable that feature, if they wish it to be enabled. And the user doesn’t need to rely on the vendor for that either. That requirement is yet also the choice of the manufacturer to force people to subscribe.Recall notices: no law requires the manufacturer to reach out to each and every user of the product. In particular not against user’s will. And once again this is something that requires no registration or vendor’s app, and is something the user decides to do.In 2025 there is really no need to do per-vendor recalls too. There do exist national bodies, that coördinate such stuff.

author: thm_w
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 20, 2025, 09:48:25 pm
content: Quote from: golden_labels on August 20, 2025, 06:14:32 amJust because you've demonstrated other anti-counterfeiting methods may exist that do not require registration does not instantly make their chosen method illogical and "PR manipulation". The CEO of DJI is an aerospace engineer, maybe he made the call, maybe marketing did, who knows.I don't see the relevance either way, if you want it stopped its probably not going to be DJI themselves doing anything, it will be some level of consumer protection law.DJI has around 80% of the US drone market, and about 35% for action cameras. They've had this activation present in their cameras for 5+ years, so its clearly not affecting their sales significantly.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 20, 2025, 10:47:48 pm
content: Quote from: thm_w on August 18, 2025, 08:51:33 pmNo, the clone would not need registration at all, making it a better product than the original

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 20, 2025, 10:50:52 pm
content: The problem is that once people get used to this bullshit and can't see the problem, it's slippery slope - instead of a 1-off registration, it needs renewing every year.Maybe next year there's a charge to re-register, then they require a subscription to continue to use certain features....

author: thm_w
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 20, 2025, 11:34:03 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on August 20, 2025, 10:47:48 pmYes we already discussed that. You can say pirated software is better as its easy to reinstall, pirated movies are better as they have no built in ads or copy protection, not really going to disagree there.Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on August 20, 2025, 10:50:52 pmInsta360 and DJI combined own most of the action camera market and they both have used registration for years, so people are already used to it.Slippery slope is valid. In this country existing consumer protection laws theoretically protect against requiring extra payments to use the device, whether they've ever been enforced, no idea.Looks like Sony has an option:https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1469682-REG/sony_dsc_rx0ii_cyber_shot_dsc_rx0_ii_digital.html

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 21, 2025, 03:23:50 am
content: Quote from: thm_w on August 20, 2025, 11:34:03 pmBecause nobody fights back against it.QuoteUsed to have one, have done some videos with it over the years. It's not really a competitor, it has essentially no image stabilisation built in.

author: golden_labels
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2025, 10:39:19 am
content: Quote from: thm_w on August 20, 2025, 09:48:25 pmOk, this is going nowhere.Please state your position, clearly.Because I have a growing feeling, there is no position at all. At first I thought it’s goalpost shifting. But now it looks like replying in a contrarian manner to whatever has been said in the last posts (only), without having any specific statement in mind.

author: wilfred
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2025, 11:57:31 am
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on August 20, 2025, 10:50:52 pmIf people get used to it and don't see it as a problem, then from the companies POV it isn't a problem and from the customers POV it also isn't a problem. So maybe there isn't a problem on a scale that will drive any change. Most people just want the pictures.The only real problem is for those who can't find an alternative. Maybe someone will see a market for those growing numbers of malcontents. If the numbers do grow enough.

author: golden_labels
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2025, 06:28:51 pm
content: Wilfred,it’s always the minority.Freedom of speech is not needed by the majority. Even if the majority had anything to say, only a very tiny portion will ever see any inconvenience for doing so.The right to fair trial is not needed by the majority. Most people will never face a trial. The rare exceptions are in most cases still protected by social codes, structures, and centuries-old legal practices.Freedom of association is not needed by the majority. The majority doesn’t associate. Associations are formed by those, who wish to work for a common goal, often to achieve some change. And these are minorities.Fighting corruption and bribes is not a problem for the majority. High-position bribes are only a matter to a very small minority, whereas bribes at lower level turn a social norm and form a part of economy.Individual voting is not needed by the majority. The result can be estimated from a much smaller sample with a good enough accuracy. We suffer the cost, because this way minority positions can also be counted.Consumer protection laws are not needed by the majority. If such laws need to be enacted, it means the majority has already agreed to the abuse and considers it so normal, the victims minority lost any other means of defense.I come from Poland, which — if recognized historically — is mentioned worldwide either in the context of WW2 or the fall of communism. Oh, great protests against communism and support for democracy and freedom! Unfortunately, people who truly protested in the name of higher values, were a small minority of thinkers and perhaps some urban youngsters. Oversimplifying a bit,(1)the majority went to the streets because of constant shortages of meat and toilet paper.It doesn’t matter, whatthe majority does or thinks. There are many positive reasons for that, rooted in human behavior, beyond the simple negative rooted in reasoning.And yes, this raises a somewhat frightening thought: that any big change is brought by a bunch of jerks, who disregard or even abuse the majority to meet their own needs and follow their own beliefs.(1)The oversimplification comes from skipping the complex nature of the movement. The reality involves ideological climate of the times, a mixture of different sentiments, Polish history, and the current perception built upon later rationalization and re-interpretation of the events. The key point is accurate in the context of this particular post. Most of these people quickly became unhappy when the freedom actually came, dumping the ideological part, and that still shapes politics of Poland in 2025.

author: Brumby
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 22, 2025, 06:23:23 am
content: There are several issues that are relevant that include matters of privacy and changing the deal after purchase, for example. Then there's the fundamental principle of basic functionality versus theneedfor internet connectivity. Subscription models are becoming more and more prevalent, which is a problem for me when there is nomaterialbenefit for doing so.And so the list goes on.What we are really facing is the slow and steady infiltration of these tactics such that the changes are incremental, almost unnoticeable but continue towards a degree of control that is absurd, unreasonable and unnecessary. It's like sitting in the cannibal's pot, enjoying the water while the temperature climbs ever so slowly until we finally realise - too late - that we are cooked.The signs of this are already visible, but it is only a small few that are trying to raise the alarm. The majority are simply taking the easy road of being oblivious and just enjoying the warm and fuzzy feeling, not realising how much warmer and less fuzzy things are getting.One day, people will wake up to a whole new world and will only realise how far things have deteriorated when they look back to "the good old days" when you bought an item and it was yours to do with as you pleased - including repair and/or modification - and continued to function without further cost or restriction. Some people may be OK with this. I, and others, am not."The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing"The time is now.

author: golden_labels
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2025, 10:48:50 am
content: Let me share a recent story. Not as an argument, as I despise using individual accounts to convince people. Rather as a case study and an example, that it’s not a hypothetical problem invented by ideologized extremists like myself.My mother uses a smartophone, installs apps when promised financial benefits, clicks “I accept” without thinking twice, uses no adblockers, gets caught in any marketing trap out there, collects points on member cards etc. She has no opinion on any topics related to this thread. So I assume it’s neutral enough. Recently she almost lost her job, because of such creeping changes. The “oh, but it works for the majority” kind.She’s a nurse. As a part of requirements in a new workplace, she had to renew her blood transfusion certification. That includes participating in a course and passing an exam. She did that tens of times, nothing unusual. There are like 3 companies in the country, that are permitted to give that certification. She bought the course in the closest one. First surprise: after buying the course, she learned that it’s on-line only. She can’t do it in-person. Ok, that did happen in the past. A few days before the lecture and exam she receives an email, in which she’s told everything is going to be done over Microsoft Teams. She never used it, asked me for help. Fine, I came, open the link at her laptop. Boop! “Sorry, we don’t support your platform.” I tried updating Firefox to the most recent version:(1)the error is the same. The email says, that in case of trouble you should call company’s support. It’s after the noon, they no longer work at this hour, she is to call the next day. Asking either how to run it or, perhaps, if she can simply come to their place and use their computers. The next day I answer a phone from her: the lady at the support said it’s not their problem and — literally — she doesn’t care, what happens to my mother’s job. Ok, I met with her again. I try using Chrome on her smartphone: nope. I’m trying to install Teams, hoping that perhaps from inside there I would be able to do anything. Of course she has to waive all her rights in the process, but she did. Microsoft also refuses to accept her two existing email addresses and requires creating a Microsoft one. Fine… except… no, because Microsoft’s webapp at the end of the process shows “sorry, website is currently unavailable.” She calls her boss, the boss agrees to offer hospital’s gear. Next day she comes shaken to the workplace and guess what. Teams not working at hospital’s laptop. IT guys are helpless too, despite honest efforts. Finally, in the last moment, they managed to connect using boss’ smartphone.To me this single example embodies everything that is going wrong right now, in just one event. Including that the victims are always the invisible, silent minority which just happens to be unlucky.(1)I’ll leave it out, why it’s not updated. Don’t dig into it.

author: Brumby
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 24, 2025, 01:34:48 am
content: Quote from: Brumby on August 22, 2025, 06:23:23 amQuote from: thm_w on August 20, 2025, 11:34:03 pmQuote from: Brumby on August 22, 2025, 06:23:23 amNow, you may say that not every manufacturer/supplier will take their customers down the path of subterfuge, because they are "a nice company" - but that will, I foresee, change once the barriers are manageable and the motivation is found.To put it simply, once such a company realises they are disadvantaged by not adopting such measures - they will introduce them, especially when their competitors have already lowered the expectations of the market and made it numb because that's now the norm. (As demonstrated in the above quotes.)

author: golden_labels
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 26, 2025, 08:37:19 pm
content: For these, who wish to use Clippy, a reminder. Likely it’s not going to affect the non-commercial use to express your private opinion, but be careful where you put the Clippy. It may become a different story, if you put it on your product, official commercial site, or a company car.A paperclip image is an image mark owned by Microsoft for a wide range of uses, in US registered under number 90782739.(1)(1)You can check in USPTO webapp; I can’t link, as the application prevents direct linking. Here’sa copy at Justia.com, though it seems to be outdated.

author: John B
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 27, 2025, 10:44:23 pm
content: I look at things from a principle of least privileged access. Much in the same way that it is applied to software architecture, so can it also be applied to your purchasing decisions, not to mention your very right to privacy.

author: Dr Bob
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: September 21, 2025, 03:05:37 am
content: Quote from: wilfred on August 15, 2025, 05:13:43 amFor a smartwatch, there needs to be some connecting up to one's smart phone and an app on the phone that lets the watch interoperate with the phone.A camera, OTOH, is a stand alone device or at least can be if you don't want to pair it with your phone/tablet.I'm in the market for some sort of 4k or better handheld camera to grab video snippets when loading up my real camera onto the gimbal is more hassle than it's worth. Now I'm going to make sure that there's no registration requirement before buying one. I can use the fake gmail account I had to make for something else that lives on a phone that doesn't have a SIM. The only thing that gmail account is for is to access the play store. It's not used for anything else and doesn't get accessed from any other device.

author: Dr Bob
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: September 21, 2025, 03:09:55 am
content: Counterfeit products are an issue, but this isn't the way to go about combating them. If somebody buys a fake model and it's shit, they'll likely find out the deal they got was "too good to be true" and maybe next time will buy from a better vendor (not Amazon, home of counterfeit products galore).

author: RJSV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 21, 2025, 04:07:05 am
content: Ok what's 'Least Privilege Access' ? Probably code, for:'Those who didn't PAY and register / sign-in'.Some, players in the Government cash grant game, wish to claim (their work) is all private, all privately generated IP (intellectual property) and while I'd agree that some of the legalize talk is solid, that's such a greedy and anal retentive position to take:'Adversarial with your customers, from the get-go.Getting government grants, (like the free cellphone giveaway program) makes myself at least a partial participant, as my taxpayer cash goes to the likes of these arrogant / entitled corporations.Sure they've hired the best legal fence builders, but I question the basis.Somehow, this resembles local restrictions, on blocking access to beaches, through private lands. The intent there, was to preserve public access, regardless of the status of the landowner where the road or trail goes through.That example is balancing private ownership rights, with reasonable public access down to a beach. Course now, here, someone may wish to start argument about how cut and dried the issue is. Quoting some legal jargon, perfectly yet ignoring that many laws DO extent into issues of intent, and, with effort, can have the exceptions in place.What a gross thing to have to argue against...disgusting!Rick

author: golden_labels
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 21, 2025, 04:25:24 am
content: Quote from: Dr Bob on September 21, 2025, 03:05:37 amNot at all. On two counts.First, smartwatches have an interface. Time may be set there. Preventing this is a hostile design choice. Unless you want to download data from the smartwatch or render something beyond capabilities of the simple display, there is no reason torequireconnectivity.Second, connectivity doesn’t entail arequirementfor a vendor-enforced app. And this is the assumption your statement makes. Bluetooth is a mess(1), and indeed it’s often burdersome to develop anything for it without custom solutions. But Bluetooth still offers many standard profiles. They are sufficient for most of smartwatch features.Note in both cases I used and underlined word “require.” There is a difference between verbs “to offer” and “to require.” A vendor is free to offer an app. In fact I argue a vendor should offer an app!(2)But not requiretheapp.(1)When compared to e.g. USB, or to many other communication protocols.(2)Majority of people can’t be expected to get around without it.

author: RJSV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 21, 2025, 10:07:37 am
content: I'd like to repeat my situation, why I agree with Dave's term 'Ransomware' not to rant, excessively, but just a courtesy for newcomers to this topic:The word term 'higher privilege' has been employed recently, which likely means that (I) haven't paid or earned some right, above normal folks. Even by just registering as a Google member, (for free), I supposedly have some elevated 'privilege' over normal non-members.Maybe I, uhh, don't like the political engagements that Google has, or the sick slant on daily news (my perception).Reinforced by observation. YouTube, owned by Google, has the historic MUSIC segments and artists that I love to study. (Even the romantic stuff, like Herb Alpert's ballads!)My take, being poor also, is that my taxes went to places like Google, over the last half-decade, and some access to music videos can't be that bad. They are supposed to reciprocate, to some fair degree, maybe not heavily, but some limited access to play older movies, and music is fair trade. Did I mention they get money, out of my own taxes ?I might play a 'reaction review' video, 3 times in a row, say, on a Jimi Hendrix's 'Hey Joe', take a few notes, and get inspired to study some more works. These musicians are very creative individuals, which is just what a struggling inventor appreciates! Life stories and allSo, no, I don't want to do any on-line banking, to pay subscriptions, as I don't have resources if there needs to be theft recovery, etc. Id pay cash, or check, if...Just want to get in, watch the video. But especially when I observe the big fat monopoly operating, and partially in the political activist spheres, I don't like the forced sign-ups (i.e. ransom).Today I notice, on a Google search, NO other search results, but YouTube. Used to be that, (even a week ago), a REDDIT or another site would come up, once or twice in a run of YouTube results. That's just plain observation, not somebody else's rant, telling me to hate Google, I'm observing monopoly structure, acts, and results.So I started realizing how powerful that is, to own the search engine and the product (YouTube) being 'found' in the search. You could do some subtle manipulation, besides just simple listing all YouTube, and nothing else.Used to be (couple weeks ago) a person could see other entities, although way way down in a search results list.Sooo, now I get excluded from things like a piano lessons guy, or...a music reviewer lady (Charismatic Voice). I'd like to hear her reviews and opinions...Higher privileged, or not.Soon, I fear, some social agency or official health care agency is going to use Google / YouTube as part of the patient access, to health care features....(If not already).Mainly, I just love to study the great music performers, subscription free, and low privilege labels notwithstanding!!