[Lawmen23]

Apparently Verizon just pushed 10.3.2...but I shouldn't know because I have automatic updates turned off. Does this bother anyone else?



Posted via CB10

[rthonpm]

No.

1. Part of this update is to meet the kill switch requirements put in place in California and several other states. Verizon and other carriers don't want to get hammered by the Attorney Generals of any states that enact kill switches so this protects them.

2 (more importantly). The option you turned off doesn't stop prompting you for updates, it just keeps the phone from automatically installing them. It's no different than telling Windows Updates to inform you when updates are available instead of installing them automatically.

[Lawmen23]

I still don't think it should attempt to download without my permission but it did.

Posted via CB10

[fkornre]

2 (more importantly). The option you turned off doesn't stop prompting you for updates, it just keeps the phone from automatically installing them. It's no different than telling Windows Updates to inform you when updates are available instead of installing them automatically.

Not that I care, but my phone was set to NOT install updates automatically but it was overridden. 10.3.2 is installing all by itself on my Q10.

[Lawmen23]

And what is this Killswitch nonsense in California?

Posted via CB10

[rthonpm]

See Point number one: this is required by the carriers to be in legal compliance with the laws of various states. California just has the most stringent law on this:

California Smartphone Kill-Switch Law: What It Means - InformationWeek

[7christopherr]

My q10 and z30 had same issue

Posted via CB10

[kvndoom]

Not that I care, but my phone was set to NOT install updates automatically but it was overridden. 10.3.2 is installing all by itself on my Q10.

Hence the word "mandatory" in their verbiage and not "optional."

Posted from BlackBerry Classic, Verizon, no camera, 10.3.2.2205

[fkornre]

Hence the word "mandatory" in their verbiage and not "optional."

Posted from BlackBerry Classic, Verizon, no camera, 10.3.2.2205

I know. Just letting the person who wrote what I quoted know that it does not matter that you select "do not install updates"...it will install without your permission.

[Prem WatsApp]

All for theft protection, but this might go too far in case of a government turning nasty...

Effectively quelling civil insurrection by just shutting down mobile communications on a mass scale. No more flash mobs. No more organizing a large-scale protest in a hurry, or it could be shut down very quickly...

We can trust our mobile manufacturer, but can we trust governments to not abuse their powers against us and the manufacturers - in the long term?

A lot of recent legislation regarding theft, censorship, child abuse material, anti-terrorist, etc. can be used for good and for bad in the right or wrong hands. Just throwing this out.

Mandatory update? I guess so... :-D

�   Chendroid or not? - QNoX powered ftw...?   �

[rthonpm]

All for theft protection, but this might go too far in case of a government turning nasty...

Effectively quelling civil insurrection by just shutting down mobile communications on a mass scale. No more flash mobs. No more organizing a large-scale protest in a hurry, or it could be shut down very quickly...

We can trust our mobile manufacturer, but can we trust governments to not abuse their powers against us and the manufacturers - in the long term?

A lot of recent legislation regarding theft, censorship, child abuse material, anti-terrorist, etc. can be used for good and for bad in the right or wrong hands. Just throwing this out.

Mandatory update? I guess so... :-D

�   Chendroid or not? - QNoX powered ftw...?   �

Poor argument: if third world dictators have taught us anything you kill the mobile networks, not the handsets. It seems unlikely that the government would have the time to log into every person's phone management account and report their phone as stolen, especially since every system for this I've seen is entirely separate from the carrier.

Posted via CB10

[Richard Buckley]

All for theft protection, but this might go too far in case of a government turning nasty...

Effectively quelling civil insurrection by just shutting down mobile communications on a mass scale. No more flash mobs. No more organizing a large-scale protest in a hurry, or it could be shut down very quickly...

We can trust our mobile manufacturer, but can we trust governments to not abuse their powers against us and the manufacturers - in the long term?

A lot of recent legislation regarding theft, censorship, child abuse material, anti-terrorist, etc. can be used for good and for bad in the right or wrong hands. Just throwing this out.

Mandatory update? I guess so... :-D

•   Chendroid or not? - QNoX powered ftw...?   •

Poor argument: if third world dictators have taught us anything you kill the mobile networks, not the handsets. It seems unlikely that the government would have the time to log into every person's phone management account and report their phone as stolen, especially since every system for this I've seen is entirely separate from the carrier.

Posted via CB10

Good points from rthonpm. Another is, as far as I am aware, the way the anti-theft system in Protect works is all on the handset side. If you can not authenticate to the BBID used to set up the phone you can not re-configure it for some other ID even after it has been wiped. So the phone is useless. If you do nothing the phone remains in its current configuration but still useless (assuming the owner set up a password) to a thief. Either way, much better than carrier or manufacturer controlled kill switches both from a government abuse and a secondhand market point of view.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[kgbbz10]

Poor argument: if third world dictators have taught us anything you kill the mobile networks, not the handsets. It seems unlikely that the government would have the time to log into every person's phone management account and report their phone as stolen, especially since every system for this I've seen is entirely separate from the carrier.

Posted via CB10

That's only if you are under the assumption that they would need to entire each number individually. But that kind of thinking isn't very realistic.

Posted via CB10

[syplex]

Complete horse dung. The setting should be honored, if it can be simply ignored then it isn't my phone. Third world dictators, or first world agencies gone amok for that matter, can and will use this type of power.

It is much easier politically to target people in a certain area or using a certain phone or with a certain name or number than shutting down the entire phone network. And don't think for a second that some supposed technological hoops make any worries about this null and void. Technology solves problems like that in a second.

Posted via CB10

[Bla1ze]

Complete horse sh*t. The setting should be honored, if it can be simply ignored then it isn't my phone. Third world dictators, or first world agencies gone amok for that matter, can and will use this type of power.

It is much easier politically to target people in a certain area or using a certain phone or with a certain name or number than shutting down the entire phone network. And don't think for a second that some supposed technological hoops make any worries about this null and void. Technology solves problems like that in a second.

Posted via CB10

[rthonpm]

That's only if you are under the assumption that they would need to entire each number individually. But that kind of thinking isn't very realistic.

Posted via CB10

...And yet your logic is still less effective than the prospect of shutting down the wireless networks... Why go after fifty million handsets when all you need to do is shut down the networks that make all of them work?

It's a freaking update to a phone, not the end of human civilisation. After all, horror of horrors your new car in Minnesota still has a tag in the glove box saying it meets California emissions even if you never go there.

Get out of the internet echo chamber and actually live out among real people for a little while...

[kgbbz10]

...And yet your logic is still less effective than the prospect of shutting down the wireless networks... Why go after fifty million handsets when all you need to do is shut down the networks that make all of them work?

It's a freaking update to a phone, not the end of human civilisation. After all, horror of horrors your new car in Minnesota still has a tag in the glove box saying it meets California emissions even if you never go there.

Get out of the internet echo chamber and actually live out among real people for a little while...

NSA has records of everyone, DHS has terrorist lists, dissenter lists, why would they need to shut down an entire system when they can just shut down those they feel pose a threat? They wouldn't.

Go read something.

BBClassic10 

[playfoot]

Apparently Verizon just pushed 10.3.2...but I shouldn't know because I have automatic updates turned off. Does this bother anyone else?



Posted via CB10

A question for the sake of argument and enlightenment. And yes, in answer to your question, it does bother me. IF someone was visiting CA or one of the other States that has this mandatory upgrade requirement, for an extended time, with an unlocked phone roaming on the network, say 90 days for work, would the network require the phone to upgrade?

[onlybuggin]

The auto update status should have been honored with a time limit after which the update would have been forced. In my case the update started on my way to work. I only found out when I checked the notice in the HUB. But too late. "Keep phone plugged in to a power source" and " you can still use your phone ". For me, that not possible. I don't sit at a desk. I'm on a sales floor. And my phone keeps me in more immediate contact with my emails and other information. And then was I dinged for the 1.1gb and 1.6 gb downloads against my data plan? I would have happily waited until I returned home to perform the update either over wifi or through link/blend.

Posted via CB10

[syplex]

This kind of reply is really not helpful to the discussion.

[Bla1ze]

This kind of reply is really not helpful to the discussion.

I wasn't trying to be helpful. I was trying to maintain some civility. And it was much better than banning you for evading the swear word filter or issuing forums infractions. Any other comments you like to add to the subject or do you wish to continue back seat modding?

Refrain from Backseat Modding - refers to ordinary users taking a moderator-like tone in criticizing other members. Do not do this. If you feel a post or thread requires moderation, please use the report post button.

[peter0328]

I wasn't trying to be helpful. I was trying to maintain some civility. And it was much better than banning you for evading the swear word filter or issuing forums infractions. Any other comments you like to add to the subject or do you wish to continue back seat modding?

Since you are a mod, it makes sense for the opinion of the user to be voiced in the public forum, since it wouldn't make sense to report your post to yourself now would it?

I also fail to see how he attempted to evade a swear filter, since his content has been censored.

Regarding the update, it is BS that it is being forced without our explicit consent. I have contacted Verizon and will be filing for compensation due to them removing features and functionality, as well as modifying the device interface when I opted out of updates.

10.3.x has a terrible UI compared to 10.2.x

If you were charged for any data usage due to this mandatory update contact Verizon and demand credit for 2GB since they pushed the update over their own network with no way to pause or cancel.

Posted via CB10

[syplex]

I wasn't trying to be helpful. I was trying to maintain some civility. And it was much better than banning you for evading the swear word filter or issuing forums infractions. Any other comments you like to add to the subject or do you wish to continue back seat modding?

Sorry about that. I would like to talk about this issue some more. How can we trust the security of a device when a basic feature such as "block updates" doesn't work? This doesn't bode well for BlackBerry's positioning of itself as an enterprise security leader. If you can't trust a basic OS setting to listen to you, what other OS settings can be overridden by the network provider? Or by BB? Can they turn off device encryption? For the record, I went to the 10.3.2 official from Verizon on my Z30 after running a leak on my Z10 and seeing the speed benefit. I like the OS. My problem is the transparency of control over a device that I own (bought off-contract). What settings do I and do I not have control over? Then I guess there is a debate over what I *should* have control over.

BTW I edited my self-censored word usage, but I do see it all the time around here. Also how do posts like your previous one meet this etiquette guideline (no intent at backseat modding)?

Make Relevant & Meaningful Posts - Do your best at all times to make relevant, meaningful and helpful posts in our communities.

[Richard Buckley]

Sorry about that. I would like to talk about this issue some more. How can we trust the security of a device when a basic feature such as "block updates" doesn't work? This doesn't bode well for BlackBerry's positioning of itself as an enterprise security leader. If you can't trust a basic OS setting to listen to you, what other OS settings can be overridden by the network provider? Or by BB? Can they turn off device encryption? For the record, I went to the 10.3.2 official from Verizon on my Z30 after running a leak on my Z10 and seeing the speed benefit. I like the OS. My problem is the transparency of control over a device that I own (bought off-contract). What settings do I and do I not have control over? Then I guess there is a debate over what I *should* have control over.

BTW I edited my self-censored word usage, but I do see it all the time around here. Also how do posts like your previous one meet this etiquette guideline (no intent at backseat modding)?

You should probably start with your user agreement with Verizon. Since your phone is operating on their network they probably reserve the right to have some control over the software in use. If not then you may have cause for complaint against Verizon.

[playfoot]

Sorry about that. I would like to talk about this issue some more. How can we trust the security of a device when a basic feature such as "block updates" doesn't work? This doesn't bode well for BlackBerry's positioning of itself as an enterprise security leader. If you can't trust a basic OS setting to listen to you, what other OS settings can be overridden by the network provider? Or by BB? Can they turn off device encryption? For the record, I went to the 10.3.2 official from Verizon on my Z30 after running a leak on my Z10 and seeing the speed benefit. I like the OS. My problem is the transparency of control over a device that I own (bought off-contract). What settings do I and do I not have control over? Then I guess there is a debate over what I *should* have control over.

BTW I edited my self-censored word usage, but I do see it all the time around here. Also how do posts like your previous one meet this etiquette guideline (no intent at backseat modding)?

You raise a very good point.

Even ignoring any EUA that states a carrier has the right to unilaterally make changes, and such significant sweeping changes so that the phone is significantly modified, this means the capability exists to access the phone at any time.

This is a serious blow to BB's vaunted security. If the technology, the key, the encryption or by whatever means such an override is possible is known to or falls into the hands of a nefarious entity . . . The mind boggles.

As with my previous question above, I would hope to have an answer a simple user like me might be able to understand.