Hacking for interoperability was made legal under case law in the Lexmark case. So this will be hacked, legally, probably a week after it's released. Kinda makes it pointless IMO.
No hacking needed. All you need is to get your cert signed by USB-IF (or self-sign and install your root CA on all machines you plan to use your custom stuff on). It's all very TLS/SSL-like, and I personally feel that that's a very positive thing.
Oh, and if you work in an environment where you need to restrict USB devices due to security/privacy/trade secret knowledge (like, say, a bank), you can install your own certs to USB cables and devices like thumbdrives, and only allow those to connect fully. Meanwhile, everything else, like phones, can just sit around in power-only mode.
It's pretty easy to mistake this tech as being the return of HDCP, but on USB type-C. The article isn't actually very clear on what/why these interconnects would need to be protected, and the thing most people think of is HDCP and the usage of HDCP strippers to bypass that.
The return of HDCP? HDCP, sadly, doesn't seem to be going anywhere despite being a very real annoyance to legitimate users and irrelevant to the pirates it purports to stop.
Not quite: HDCP is full-blown encryption, while this is just authentication.
Why this is needed is because the proliferation of incorrectly made unlicensed USB-C cables has become something of a crisis where the cheap laptops started destroying phones and laptops. Something had to be done to ensure that using a USB-C cable doesn't fry your device, and I'm not sure what else they could do to prevent that short of an authentication mechanism like this.
What I was picturing when I read this is a company, most likely Apple, creating a device that only authenticates with USB-C cables of a specific brand. Which seems completely possible under this spec.
If that does happen, that's the thing that will be hacked in about a week.
If a non-MFi cable is used, it's charge rate is restricted to 100mah.
Face it, I don't like Apple anymore than you probably do, but they were right to future proof lightening with a certification circuit considering it will inevitably be used for USB-C like it is on the MacBook.
While I can understand the need for cables to be verifiable as being capable of supporting the power needed for a charger I can see this being heavily abused to hinder third party chargers and to undo what the EU tried with everyone using the same cables.I can see future Samsung chargers no longer working on lg phones and so forth. At the very least this will drive up the price of third party chargers due to a need to include the required chips.
Manufacturers <i>already<i> have the ability to make devices that require proprietary cables. A little company named "Apple" is an example.
Phones will obviously continue to allow charging without authentication. I'd be surprised if any serious manufacturer required authentication for data transfers.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
28 Comments
Back to Article
Howard - Wednesday, April 13, 2016 - link
"Tpe-C"Ryan Smith - Thursday, April 14, 2016 - link
Tpe-OWithoutWeakness - Thursday, April 14, 2016 - link
Took me a second to realize how clever this reply was.Trackster - Thursday, April 14, 2016 - link
This reply is gold.p1esk - Thursday, April 14, 2016 - link
I didn't get it...paddytokey - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
Typo (a typing error)wolfshades - Monday, April 18, 2016 - link
Wish this place had upvotes or something. This comment deserves it.barleyguy - Thursday, April 14, 2016 - link
Hacking for interoperability was made legal under case law in the Lexmark case. So this will be hacked, legally, probably a week after it's released. Kinda makes it pointless IMO.ZeDestructor - Thursday, April 14, 2016 - link
No hacking needed. All you need is to get your cert signed by USB-IF (or self-sign and install your root CA on all machines you plan to use your custom stuff on). It's all very TLS/SSL-like, and I personally feel that that's a very positive thing.Oh, and if you work in an environment where you need to restrict USB devices due to security/privacy/trade secret knowledge (like, say, a bank), you can install your own certs to USB cables and devices like thumbdrives, and only allow those to connect fully. Meanwhile, everything else, like phones, can just sit around in power-only mode.
ZeDestructor - Thursday, April 14, 2016 - link
Source: I read the bloody spec.Manch - Thursday, April 14, 2016 - link
LOL, I was wondering what he was on about...JoeyJoJo123 - Thursday, April 14, 2016 - link
It's pretty easy to mistake this tech as being the return of HDCP, but on USB type-C. The article isn't actually very clear on what/why these interconnects would need to be protected, and the thing most people think of is HDCP and the usage of HDCP strippers to bypass that.chaos215bar2 - Thursday, April 14, 2016 - link
The return of HDCP? HDCP, sadly, doesn't seem to be going anywhere despite being a very real annoyance to legitimate users and irrelevant to the pirates it purports to stop.Guspaz - Thursday, April 14, 2016 - link
Not quite: HDCP is full-blown encryption, while this is just authentication.Why this is needed is because the proliferation of incorrectly made unlicensed USB-C cables has become something of a crisis where the cheap laptops started destroying phones and laptops. Something had to be done to ensure that using a USB-C cable doesn't fry your device, and I'm not sure what else they could do to prevent that short of an authentication mechanism like this.
Guspaz - Thursday, April 14, 2016 - link
Sorry, I meant "where the cheap cables", not "where the cheap laptops".barleyguy - Friday, April 15, 2016 - link
What I was picturing when I read this is a company, most likely Apple, creating a device that only authenticates with USB-C cables of a specific brand. Which seems completely possible under this spec.If that does happen, that's the thing that will be hacked in about a week.
zodiacfml - Friday, April 15, 2016 - link
Thinking the same thing while reading it. They will be able circumvent the new feature.Samus - Thursday, April 14, 2016 - link
All the sudden Apple's MFi certification doesn't seem so ridiculousdamianrobertjones - Thursday, April 14, 2016 - link
...Yet you can still buy really crappy cables and chargers?Samus - Friday, April 15, 2016 - link
If a non-MFi cable is used, it's charge rate is restricted to 100mah.Face it, I don't like Apple anymore than you probably do, but they were right to future proof lightening with a certification circuit considering it will inevitably be used for USB-C like it is on the MacBook.
Murloc - Thursday, April 14, 2016 - link
so iphones are going to have any non-apple USB-C accessory restricted by default or something?SirKnobsworth - Thursday, April 14, 2016 - link
Hard to day, given that Apple still hasn't put Lightning out of its misery.qlum - Thursday, April 14, 2016 - link
While I can understand the need for cables to be verifiable as being capable of supporting the power needed for a charger I can see this being heavily abused to hinder third party chargers and to undo what the EU tried with everyone using the same cables.I can see future Samsung chargers no longer working on lg phones and so forth. At the very least this will drive up the price of third party chargers due to a need to include the required chips.HomeworldFound - Thursday, April 14, 2016 - link
Yes, this gives companies a reason to sell us a $60 charger when a simple $10 cable will do.Rmattp - Thursday, April 14, 2016 - link
Well, this will give manufactures the ability to make proprietary cables again... great...grant3 - Tuesday, April 19, 2016 - link
Manufacturers <i>already<i> have the ability to make devices that require proprietary cables. A little company named "Apple" is an example.Phones will obviously continue to allow charging without authentication. I'd be surprised if any serious manufacturer required authentication for data transfers.
damianrobertjones - Wednesday, April 20, 2016 - link
I cannot wait for the other standards... Mini-type C, micro-type C, full type-c.All about the $$$$. Speed comes seconds
azerd - Monday, May 2, 2016 - link
I personally feel that that's a very positive thing i think that can give strong securityhere you will find what it takes https://accessories.searchub.com/cables/