For one, they could silently track devices when they are stolen, Cell carriers have been able to do this since the switch from Analog. The technology is in the phone (AGPS.)
Prevent wiping/resetting/tethering/sim-removal if the device is locked. Like
If the device is at the lock screen and any of the following happen...
- SIM card removed, send a tamper-alert to the cell carrier to track the device until the screen is unlocked
- No wipe or factory reset while the screen is locked
- No access to data on the device while the screen is locked (eg do not allow anything but USB charge while locked)
In addition, from any other computer, the user can login to their apple account and send any of the following commands
- Remote track on/off - this will track the device wether the screen is locked or not, allowing law enforcement to track it.
- Remote data salvage - this will send all the data from the device to apple (regardless of the device size) allowing the data to be downloaded to a computer or...
- Remote data erase - this will erase all user-data from the device, but not the screen lock password, allowing law enforcement to still track it
- Remote self-destruct - this will tell the device to overwrite it's firmware and can not be restored except by taking it to an Apple store where the Apple representative can clearly see it's been stolen before servicing.
Allowing law-enforcement to track the device means you consider the device to be stolen. The software should have some geo-fences setup to prevent confusion between stolen and merely lost/forgotten. For example a geofence within it's home wireless access point means that the device is unlikely to be stolen. Geofences at their place of work also mean the device is probably lost at work, and can only be located while inside those geofences. (This can be done on all macs equipped with wireless adapters, even if they aren't used to connect to the network.) A Geofence can also be setup for "hometown" which means that if the device is lost/stolen on a trip outside the town, the device automatically reports where it is.
For privacy reasons, the tracking data should only store the last hour unless it's locked, in which case it should store the tracking data until the device is unlocked or remotely destroyed.
How do you figure? Or did you miss the part about the carriers not allowing the phones to connect to the network? If the ne identifiers are on a "stolen" list, or don't match those that are supposed to be on the network...no connection....period. It's now an iPod Touch. Certainly not worth $500 to anyone, but complete fools....this isn't rocket science.
This won't stop thieves, but will certainly curtail the theft of iPhones. Of course, as many others have stated.....be personally responsible for your crap, and that will be the best reduction in theft.
How many GSM networks exist in this world? Is every carrier going to know not to allow the phone onto it's network. Even CDMA phones with bad ESNs can be flashed onto another CDMA network. People were flashing lost or stolen HTC EVOs from Sprint over to Boost Mobile. If Sprint can't even stop it's stolen phones to be activated on another network that it owns how's anyone else going to?
Car companies are doing a lot. Educate yourself. (Also, read the NYT article). Moreover, taking out an iPhone to make a call or watch a video or listen to a song or surf the web is not "flashing a pricey product in public." Do you use yours only in private?
Apple has dropped the ball on this. That is simply a fact. Don't get so defensive.
EVERY Apple device that receives software updates (iphones, ipads, ipods, computers,...), pings Apple's servers with device information and waits for authorization before updating.
In the end, advice is generally is ok if it suggests reasonable measures. But not using your (smart)phone in public places is not really a reasonable advice.
Who said anything about not using your smartphone in public? People are careless, and leave their phone on a chair while they go to get a sip of water.
When people claim their phone was stolen, I dont' think it's a hold up in most cases.
The story is obvious. Cities don't want to spend extra money dealing with thefts (even marginally) that they think can be prevented by phone makers implementing various technology.
Many people will remember that insurance companies and car owners pushed for steering wheel locks and coded keys for similar reasons.
That's what they want to spend time on. Not dealing with crime rate increases caused by electronic thefts.
If car theft and insurance companies is the best example you can find, this "phone theft" crime isn't going away. If someone is losing a few phone via "theft" per year, I question this person for not being an idiot in the first place. You can't draw a direct cause-effect on petty crime like this and expect manufacturers to "DO MORE". More of what? You really want a kill switch on your phone? More tracking and give up more privacy?
Here's a good way of avoiding phone theft, go get an android. Better yet, the the most ugly looking and out going model. Done deal, this is a phone theft prevention in a bottle. Oh, you may even save a few dollars.
Don't take a simple issue and make it more complicated and expect a "tech solution" for everything. It's just common sense.
Who said anything about not using your smartphone in public? People are careless, and leave their phone on a chair while they go to get a sip of water.
When people claim their phone was stolen, I dont' think it's a hold up in most cases.
It's negligence.
See Flat, user noirdeir was responding to a post in this thread where the writer blames the victim for "flashing" expensive items in public, such as large-denomination currency, or Rolex watches, or diamonds, or iPhones. Yes, the implication was clear; you should not use your iPhone in some areas, because you're asking to be robbed.
As to your point about carelessness: let us distinguish between the actual carelessness whereby a person drops their phone in the toilet, or loses it in (never to be found) in the forest, where the loss involves only the actions of the oneself, and not the actual taking of someone else's property with the intent of personal gain. Now if I see someone unknowingly drop a $5 bill in the parking lot, and I have opportunity to pick up the bill, then it is my ethical obligation to return it to the person, if possible. If I intentionally wait until they drive away, then I could take the bill, but I will still have obtained it unethically. If I merely find a $5 bill in the parking lot, then it's mine: there is no way to identify the owner. If I find a $50,000 automobile in the parking lot, it is *not* mine to take... ownership may be determined. And if I find a bag of $50,000 cash in the lot, I can assume it will be claimed and it is my obligation to offer it to the authorities. Similarly, if I find a $5 bill in a wallet containing ID and contact information, then it is my ethical obligation to either return it or deposit it with a civil "lost and found". And similarly, if I find a $700 iPhone, anywhere, at any time, it is not mine to take. Even if its broken, or has a depreciated value of only $5. Regardless of how the phone came to be laying in the parking lot, or on the bar counter, or in the bathroom, or in the airplane seat-back pocket. That the owner was negligent in keeping track of it is irrelevant. It is not mine.
it amazes me here in L.A. when people leave their MacBooks in a Starbucks to go to the bathroom and ask Larry David to watch it.
I leave my stuff all the stuff unattended all the time. I take my phone. That's it. I figure the odds of someone swiping my stuff are very low. If I was really worried I'd use a Kensington lock on it as someone ould just as easily walk in while I'k using it, grab and head to a waiting a car outside before I could do anything.
What I don't ever do is ask anyone to watch my stuff. These strangers aren't anymore trust worthy than other strangers, and the idea of putting some burden on them as being guardians of my stuff bothers me.
Please notify me when these c•cks•ckers print something positive about Apple. They are at war with Apple and have turned into an unreliable source for ANYTHING! The NYT is a somewhat respectable looking National Enquirer!
Comments
Most of these features are already available.
How many GSM networks exist in this world? Is every carrier going to know not to allow the phone onto it's network. Even CDMA phones with bad ESNs can be flashed onto another CDMA network. People were flashing lost or stolen HTC EVOs from Sprint over to Boost Mobile. If Sprint can't even stop it's stolen phones to be activated on another network that it owns how's anyone else going to?
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Car companies are doing a lot. Educate yourself. (Also, read the NYT article). Moreover, taking out an iPhone to make a call or watch a video or listen to a song or surf the web is not "flashing a pricey product in public." Do you use yours only in private?
Apple has dropped the ball on this. That is simply a fact. Don't get so defensive.
Very good.
BS! APPLE CAN DO A LOT MORE!
EVERY Apple device that receives software updates (iphones, ipads, ipods, computers,...), pings Apple's servers with device information and waits for authorization before updating.
That is when Apple can disable a stolen device.
Quote:
Originally Posted by noirdesir
In the end, advice is generally is ok if it suggests reasonable measures. But not using your (smart)phone in public places is not really a reasonable advice.
Who said anything about not using your smartphone in public? People are careless, and leave their phone on a chair while they go to get a sip of water.
When people claim their phone was stolen, I dont' think it's a hold up in most cases.
It's negligence.
iWatch should be a good solution for this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
The story is obvious. Cities don't want to spend extra money dealing with thefts (even marginally) that they think can be prevented by phone makers implementing various technology.
Many people will remember that insurance companies and car owners pushed for steering wheel locks and coded keys for similar reasons.
That's what they want to spend time on. Not dealing with crime rate increases caused by electronic thefts.
If car theft and insurance companies is the best example you can find, this "phone theft" crime isn't going away. If someone is losing a few phone via "theft" per year, I question this person for not being an idiot in the first place. You can't draw a direct cause-effect on petty crime like this and expect manufacturers to "DO MORE". More of what? You really want a kill switch on your phone? More tracking and give up more privacy?
Here's a good way of avoiding phone theft, go get an android. Better yet, the the most ugly looking and out going model. Done deal, this is a phone theft prevention in a bottle. Oh, you may even save a few dollars.
Don't take a simple issue and make it more complicated and expect a "tech solution" for everything. It's just common sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by See Flat
Who said anything about not using your smartphone in public? People are careless, and leave their phone on a chair while they go to get a sip of water.
When people claim their phone was stolen, I dont' think it's a hold up in most cases.
It's negligence.
See Flat, user noirdeir was responding to a post in this thread where the writer blames the victim for "flashing" expensive items in public, such as large-denomination currency, or Rolex watches, or diamonds, or iPhones. Yes, the implication was clear; you should not use your iPhone in some areas, because you're asking to be robbed.
As to your point about carelessness: let us distinguish between the actual carelessness whereby a person drops their phone in the toilet, or loses it in (never to be found) in the forest, where the loss involves only the actions of the oneself, and not the actual taking of someone else's property with the intent of personal gain. Now if I see someone unknowingly drop a $5 bill in the parking lot, and I have opportunity to pick up the bill, then it is my ethical obligation to return it to the person, if possible. If I intentionally wait until they drive away, then I could take the bill, but I will still have obtained it unethically. If I merely find a $5 bill in the parking lot, then it's mine: there is no way to identify the owner. If I find a $50,000 automobile in the parking lot, it is *not* mine to take... ownership may be determined. And if I find a bag of $50,000 cash in the lot, I can assume it will be claimed and it is my obligation to offer it to the authorities. Similarly, if I find a $5 bill in a wallet containing ID and contact information, then it is my ethical obligation to either return it or deposit it with a civil "lost and found". And similarly, if I find a $700 iPhone, anywhere, at any time, it is not mine to take. Even if its broken, or has a depreciated value of only $5. Regardless of how the phone came to be laying in the parking lot, or on the bar counter, or in the bathroom, or in the airplane seat-back pocket. That the owner was negligent in keeping track of it is irrelevant. It is not mine.
it amazes me here in L.A. when people leave their MacBooks in a Starbucks to go to the bathroom and ask Larry David to watch it.
If you can't trust Larry David then who can you trust?
I leave my stuff all the stuff unattended all the time. I take my phone. That's it. I figure the odds of someone swiping my stuff are very low. If I was really worried I'd use a Kensington lock on it as someone ould just as easily walk in while I'k using it, grab and head to a waiting a car outside before I could do anything.
What I don't ever do is ask anyone to watch my stuff. These strangers aren't anymore trust worthy than other strangers, and the idea of putting some burden on them as being guardians of my stuff bothers me.
Please notify me when these c•cks•ckers print something positive about Apple. They are at war with Apple and have turned into an unreliable source for ANYTHING! The NYT is a somewhat respectable looking National Enquirer!