New York Attorney General Presses Apple and Google on Smartphone Thefts

[Ridge Racer]

No matter what anti-theft features Apple adds to an iPhone, they won't stop the phone from being stolen in the first place. Only AFTER stealing the phone will the thief find out whether the anti-theft features were activated. By then, its too late, the theft and possible assault has been done. No thief is going to return it to the victim when they discover the phone is unusable.

In fact, it may promote further violence as the thief forces the owner to reveal the phones security code.

The only thing Apple could do to make their products less desirable to thieves is to make them less desirable to everyone.

 

[barkomatic]

Good. Apple certainly has the ability to do this. It wouldn't be hard at all. To keep the kill switch process secure, they could simply require that the owner submit a police report before they disable the phone.

Imagine what a great selling point that would be: a virtually unstealable phone!

How do you know it wouldn't be hard? Are you a hardware/software engineer at Apple or Google? Concepts that sound and appear simple are in many cases amazingly complex in their actual implementation.

Apple and Google are not law enforcement agencies, so I understand the hesitation.

 

[Boomchukalaka]

Where was this political action against a company like Nike when media outlets reported kids being killed/robbed for their Air Jordans or Sony with Walkmans back in the day? This smacks of a heavy handed response to a situation and political opportunism to me. Just another cheap and easy headline.

 

[jdechko]

It's not the manufacturer's job to combat theft of their devices.

While I agree, it's difficult for a company to say "It's not really our problem" without coming across as arrogant ******s.

I'd assume that the majority of professionally stolen iPhones (ones that are specifically targeted, not just a crime of opportunity) are immediately shut down and wiped within 24-48 hours, at most. They're given new IMEI numbers by the thieves and shipped overseas.

Chances of recovering a stolen phone in these circumstances has to be really low anyway, and by adding a way to remotely & permanently disable a phone, Apple & Google are opening themselves up to a whole different set of problems. I could see a class action lawsuit happening against Apple because a few people accidentally got their phones bricked.

 

[surma884]

My Maxima was stolen a few years ago. What is Nissan doing about this so they don't benefit from me having to repurchase a car?

What year was your Maxima? New cars have anti-theft systems that prevent hot-wiring.

 

[al0513]

It's not the manufacturer's job to combat theft of their devices.

I think it is just because they are getting a lot of heat and NYPD's recovery rate is probably pretty low. So now they are pointing the finger. Of course if Apple/Google had a Killswitch, they would say, well your data can be erased - Problem solved.

But no. it wont. FindMyiPhone is great!!!! The problem is probably that a lot of people do not have it on their phone! I always lock my phone/ipad and have FindMyiPhone.

 

[dippytoo]

UK mobile phone providers already do block stolen handsets, just needs the crime report number and the IMEI code.

 

[parseckadet]

Let me get this straight. One guy kills someone over an iPhone and another guys stabs people to get theirs, but we're going to blame the phone? What about the people who committed the crimes? I guess the iPhone is just too tempting and we'll just let it slide. It's not their fault, it's Apple's.

 

[surma884]

No matter what anti-theft features Apple adds to an iPhone, they won't stop the phone from being stolen in the first place. Only AFTER stealing the phone will the thief find out whether the anti-theft features were activated. By then, its too late, the theft and possible assault has been done. No thief is going to return it to the victim when they discover the phone is unusable.

In fact, it may promote further violence as the thief forces the owner to reveal the phones security code.

The only thing Apple could do to make their products less desirable to thieves is to make them less desirable to everyone.

Wrong. Thieves will learn quickly that the phones are being blacklisted and aren't usable. It means they can't sell it to anyone and they will stop trying to steal something they can't sell.

 

[Rossatron]

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has written to a number of smartphone manufacturers to ask what the companies are doing to combat the thefts of their devices,

lol, does he want apple to start it's own police? i always thought it was the police's job to take care of crimes - and last time i've checked, theft was a crime...

 

[eharley]

Here in Baltimore, we had a similarly brutal and senseless mugging turned into a murder only three years ago. Stephen Pitcairn handed over his wallet and then was stabbed for his phone.

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/20...ug-related-arrests-and-convictions-detectives

On the one hand, the police were able to use the phone to track down the murderers to their apartment. But on the other hand, the phone shouldn't have been so valuable to the thieves turned murderers.

The manufacturers need to step it up and help wipe out the marketplace for stolen phones just like the car manufacturers did.

 

[cmwade77]

It's not the manufacturer's job to combat theft of their devices.

Someone beat me to it. This would be like asking Ford what do they do to prevent the theft of their cars?

Yes, if you pay for it, they will add alarms, LoJack, etc., but they don't have a free service to prevent the theft of their vehicles. GM vehicles with Onstar do have the ability to make the cars slow down, but again, only if you pay for the service and report the car as stolen.

So, there are options that take care of the problem, if you are willing to pay for them. Why should phone manufactures be required to do anything to prevent the theft for free?

 

[surma884]

Where was this political action against a company like Nike when media outlets reported kids being killed/robbed for their Air Jordans or Sony with Walkmans back in the day? This smacks of a heavy handed response to a situation and political opportunism to me. Just another cheap and easy headline.

Use your head. Cell phones are traceable and can be deactivated remotely. If it's possible to do that then why not do it?

 

[portishead]

Let me get this straight. One guy kills someone over an iPhone and another guys stabs people to get theirs, but we're going to blame the phone? What about the people who committed the crimes? I guess the iPhone is just too tempting and we'll just let it slide. It's not their fault, it's Apple's.

Way to miss the point. If security measures were in place to dissuade thieves from stealing phones in the first place... naw that just makes too much sense.

 

[KdParker]

They don't require automobile makers to put a kill swich in all cars that are sold.

So why should phone manufacturers be required.

 

[phillipduran]

And why exactly does Apple need to do something here? It's not their responsibility to implement systems to investigate where stolen property goes or to remote wipe anything.

 

[DTphonehome]

Where was this political action against a company like Nike when media outlets reported kids being killed/robbed for their Air Jordans or Sony with Walkmans back in the day? This smacks of a heavy handed response to a situation and political opportunism to me. Just another cheap and easy headline.

Sneakers are not Internet connected devices with unique serial numbers and network identifiers.

 

[eharley]

While smartphone thefts need attention, the NY AG sure seems to be interested in projects that seem rather silly. A smartphone is a fairly big deal considering the price (off contract), but does the NY AG really need to be involved?

The state AGs have really stepped up their game because nobody else seems to be taking up these causes. Also, they are often effective at getting the companies to take action.

Previous NY state AG Cuomo used that position as a launching pad for the governor's mansion. Same thing now.

 

[DTphonehome]

They don't require automobile makers to put a kill swich in all cars that are sold.

So why should phone manufacturers be required.

Most cars are not Internet connected. The ones that are (Onstar, etc) DO have kill switches, and their recovery rates are far higher. Which is reflected in the discount you get on insurance if you have a car with that feature.

 

[taeclee99]

In other words- Get an android phone if you want to live.

 

[dove]

As someone who had two smartphones stolen in the last year (while partying in two different developing countries) I do think Apple and Google could do more.

For instance, if an iPhone was previously used with an Apple ID then Apple could disallow use of the Internet with a different Apple ID (or no Apple ID) unless the previous owner 'releases' his phone. Yes, this would be hassle for some use cases—e.g. it would take user education for the second hand market—but this strikes me as a sane default going forward.

As is, the Find My Phone feature is all but useless since the first thing thieves do when they steal a phone, is turn it off and remove the SIM card.

Incidentally, I'm now using a €20 Samsung. It's unlikely that I will buy another smartphone in the next year unless a phone on par with the 16GB iPhone 4S is available for €350 or less. I just wanted to throw this out there because I read the most ridiculous comments when it comes to rumors of a cheaper iPhone. You don't have to be poor to want a cheaper iPhone!

 

[eharley]

Didn't I read that most stolen phones just get exported overseas?

Source please.

 

[surma884]

Someone beat me to it. This would be like asking Ford what do they do to prevent the theft of their cars?

Yes, if you pay for it, they will add alarms, LoJack, etc., but they don't have a free service to prevent the theft of their vehicles. GM vehicles with Onstar do have the ability to make the cars slow down, but again, only if you pay for the service and report the car as stolen.

So, there are options that take care of the problem, if you are willing to pay for them. Why should phone manufactures be required to do anything to prevent the theft for free?

Because it's very low cost and requires very low resources. It's no different that satellite receivers. You cannot use a receiver that is registered to someone else. The owner has to un-register it before anyone else can activate it. Do the satellite companies charge you extra for that protection? Since phones are used all over the world and across different networks it requires the cooperation of the manufacturers and carriers to agree on having a blacklist to prevent activation of phones on their network if they are blacklisted.

 

[AppleMark]

Sure it is. If the resale value is $0 instead of $20, then no ones phone is going to get stolen.
We don't user operated kill switches. Apple+the carriers know your unique device identifiers. They could blacklist the device so it would never work on a network again. Sure, I supposed the device would still have some value as an ipod touch type device but I think the thieves would move on to stealing something else.

You missed my point. Which is becoming quite common here on MR..

You need to consider that people delinquent and/or desperate enough to commit crimes of this sort, will often not be aware, or even care about the consequences of a database. I think, with respect that it is naive to state that "no ones phone is going to get stolen" as a result of the database.

Yes...., a database may stop the phone being sold, or maybe able to block it from use.

However, the original owner will still be lying in a pool of his own blood....and that was my main point.

A database is not going to stop a person being killed for their iPhone.

 

[eharley]

They don't require automobile makers to put a kill swich in all cars that are sold.

So why should phone manufacturers be required.

Because the car manufacturers have adopted other measures that are effective deterrents of theft.

The phone manufacturers are creating a public nuisance if their product is the primary driver of theft and violence and the manufacturers could easily do something about it but choose to do nothing.