DJI Is Locking Down Its Drones Against a Growing Army of DIY Hackers
- Thread starter LuvMyTJ
- Start date
dirkclod
Premium Pilot
I love how people are concerned about DJI getting info and complaining about DJI heavy handed approach (both things are true, btw, and in line with what a lot of other companies do)... and, yet, many jump to download a random APK from the internet without knowing much about it.
And I'm not talking about the people who download the modified source and recompile themselves... but the people who go and download any random APK (from someone who is hacking someone else's code) onto their Android phone/tablet, surprise me...
I'm all for people taking control of the devices they buy. I'm not for a random internet person installing an unknown APK onto my devices. The risk is many times higher (especially on Android) than whatever DJI might do
And I'm not talking about the people who download the modified source and recompile themselves... but the people who go and download any random APK (from someone who is hacking someone else's code) onto their Android phone/tablet, surprise me...
I'm all for people taking control of the devices they buy. I'm not for a random internet person installing an unknown APK onto my devices. The risk is many times higher (especially on Android) than whatever DJI might do
Interesting debate and I see both sides. Although, i think its fair to to say jailbroken drones are SIGNIFICANTLY different to other jailbroken devices, like mobile phones.
I literally cannot see the upside of a corporation like many manufacturers who maintain locked bootloaders; not letting developers modify system files for the wider dev community to use to unleash the potential (and fun) you can have with your device. I mean, having a rooted phone, or unlocked bootloader DOES open up its vulnerabilities and can more easily be hacked, but this is really within the users CONTROL depending on how/where they use their phone, knowing the risks they are taking.
In my mind, i think that's far less of a risk, far less of a problem, when compared to jailbroken quadcopters. I'm a new P4P owner and knowing that just about ANYONE and everyone old enough to learn using a remote control with some practice, can become a quadcopter or DJI pilot' is actually quite scary. The numbers of quad owners will grow year on year...which means the number of potentials using them irresponsibly (ruining it for others), will also grow. Not only that, freely available hacks, while they may FREE your drone and emancipate you from DJI, it also means those irresponsible people are likely to use it in an area that's going to cause harm, property damage, or be involved in a fatal accident, which would just be unforgivable.
I'm sure as I develop my skills, fly more often, I will get the urge to break the chains, but until then I'll be comfortable flying within the set limits until I think this becomes a genuine problem for me - as a smart and safe P4P flyer. I'd hate to see even bigger fines, MORE restrictions globally, or even mandatory licensing involved in ALL levels of quadcopter ownership, which might be the unfortunate result of improper use...and any news story these days are out there to condemn quadcopters, NOT praise them - so watching this on the wrong side of too many news stories will become increasingly unsettling.
RoOSTA
I literally cannot see the upside of a corporation like many manufacturers who maintain locked bootloaders; not letting developers modify system files for the wider dev community to use to unleash the potential (and fun) you can have with your device. I mean, having a rooted phone, or unlocked bootloader DOES open up its vulnerabilities and can more easily be hacked, but this is really within the users CONTROL depending on how/where they use their phone, knowing the risks they are taking.
In my mind, i think that's far less of a risk, far less of a problem, when compared to jailbroken quadcopters. I'm a new P4P owner and knowing that just about ANYONE and everyone old enough to learn using a remote control with some practice, can become a quadcopter or DJI pilot' is actually quite scary. The numbers of quad owners will grow year on year...which means the number of potentials using them irresponsibly (ruining it for others), will also grow. Not only that, freely available hacks, while they may FREE your drone and emancipate you from DJI, it also means those irresponsible people are likely to use it in an area that's going to cause harm, property damage, or be involved in a fatal accident, which would just be unforgivable.
I'm sure as I develop my skills, fly more often, I will get the urge to break the chains, but until then I'll be comfortable flying within the set limits until I think this becomes a genuine problem for me - as a smart and safe P4P flyer. I'd hate to see even bigger fines, MORE restrictions globally, or even mandatory licensing involved in ALL levels of quadcopter ownership, which might be the unfortunate result of improper use...and any news story these days are out there to condemn quadcopters, NOT praise them - so watching this on the wrong side of too many news stories will become increasingly unsettling.
RoOSTA
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2017
- Messages
- 18
- Reaction score
- 6
- Age
- 78
I agree 100%. Canada has a 90 meter altitude restriction as well as a 500 meter downrange restriction and the last update LOCKED those two parameters into both my Mavic Pro and Phantom 4 Pro. I'm thinking WHY are the Chinese enforcing Canada's drone laws for them. THIS IS JUST PLAIN WRONG and I've purchased my last DJI product EVER!!
Because, unlike communists, DJI believes that the industry should self-regulate to prevent government regulation
It's in DJI's business interest to be seen as a "good citizen", given that they are by far the #1 player and almost every time there's a negative headline it's a DJI drone. You can agree or disagree with their approach, but it makes a lot of business sense to ensure that the authorities see them as a safe player. If one day Canada decided to regulate drones even more, and only drones with those limitations are legal, DJI will have the market to themselves
Want to own your drone? Build an Arducopter based one, and you can do anything you want. It'll cost more and offer less integration (not to mention clunkier hardware), but you own it
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2017
- Messages
- 18
- Reaction score
- 6
- Age
- 78
The simple fact is, I just don't give a crap anymore. I've lost pretty much all the interest I had when I first bought them. First the Phantom 3 Pro, then the Phantom 4 Pro and then the Mavic Pro but when they're gone, then that'll be it for me. I am simply NO LONGER INTERESTED in flying drones. The fun is gone because of bad government intervention.
Our IDIOT of a Transport Minister, (Marc Garneau) the famous (Legend in his own mind) twit of an astronaut, seems to think we can't be trusted with drones so HE ALONE can make laws against them. THIS TOO IS WRONG and shouldn't be allowed in any Democracy.
Sorry, but Canada has taken all the enjoyment out of it.
Bud
Our IDIOT of a Transport Minister, (Marc Garneau) the famous (Legend in his own mind) twit of an astronaut, seems to think we can't be trusted with drones so HE ALONE can make laws against them. THIS TOO IS WRONG and shouldn't be allowed in any Democracy.
Sorry, but Canada has taken all the enjoyment out of it.
Bud
Because, unlike communists, DJI believes that the industry should self-regulate to prevent government regulation
It's in DJI's business interest to be seen as a "good citizen", given that they are by far the #1 player and almost every time there's a negative headline it's a DJI drone. You can agree or disagree with their approach, but it makes a lot of business sense to ensure that the authorities see them as a safe player. If one day Canada decided to regulate drones even more, and only drones with those limitations are legal, DJI will have the market to themselves
Want to own your drone? Build an Arducopter based one, and you can do anything you want. It'll cost more and offer less integration (not to mention clunkier hardware), but you own it
I think this post sums up DJI's position very clearly. They are trying to get ahead of restrictive lows by self-policing.Because, unlike communists, DJI believes that the industry should self-regulate to prevent government regulation
It's in DJI's business interest to be seen as a "good citizen", given that they are by far the #1 player and almost every time there's a negative headline it's a DJI drone. You can agree or disagree with their approach, but it makes a lot of business sense to ensure that the authorities see them as a safe player. If one day Canada decided to regulate drones even more, and only drones with those limitations are legal, DJI will have the market to themselves
Want to own your drone? Build an Arducopter based one, and you can do anything you want. It'll cost more and offer less integration (not to mention clunkier hardware), but you own it
If you want a drone without NFZ and height restrictions, then it's time to get something else. DJI is the 800 lb gorilla in this space, Phantoms are what most people see when a news story comes out. They are going to have the most restrictions and also the most bang for the buck.
I can understand people upset over the NFZ limits. What I don't understand is why people are getting upset over the telemetry information being collected. A lot of apps collect usage data. It helps debug issues and identify potential problem areas.
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2017
- Messages
- 134
- Reaction score
- 68
- Age
- 59
I would think more people would be worried about what information is being collected from individual internet and cell phone usage, than just from drones.
Pretty well written article that presents a lot of fact. However, I'm firmly of the belief that consumers should be able to do as they please with products they purchase and then be responsible for their actions.
I don't think any future drone purchases will be from DJI for myself and I'll seek alternatives.
I don't think any future drone purchases will be from DJI for myself and I'll seek alternatives.
It is kind of Apples or Googles 
You cannot have them both, but like some from each world.
DJI has grown so much, that it is difficult to see how they will maintain their growth in the next several years.
As the biggest drone manufacturer out there, it does matter how drones will be generally accepted by the public and if additional stupid regulations are implement which might influence sales.
You cannot have them both, but like some from each world.
DJI has grown so much, that it is difficult to see how they will maintain their growth in the next several years.
As the biggest drone manufacturer out there, it does matter how drones will be generally accepted by the public and if additional stupid regulations are implement which might influence sales.
Hmmm, "responsible for their actions"... What are the color of the clouds on your planet? The widespread examples of IRRESPONSIBILITY for their own actions are the primary cause of the rapid increase in Regulations we're now seeing. If its blame you want to place, place it on the idiots who should not be allowed to own a set of dull scissors let alone a highly sophisticated drone.
We are increasingly living in a world where we don't "own" things. There are many factors driving this reality not the least of which is the inability of companies to monetize and maintain income. Technology is a powerful force driving it and we're all on the bleeding edge.
-- zigs
-- zigs
I think you are being a bit myopic here.
First, I didn't purchase usage rights. I purchased a piece of hardware. I own it (them actually). The software, well, thats another issue. Thats licensing and a whole different animal. But they are intertwined.
The point everyone seems to be making and that you are unclear on, is that DJI is altering how that piece of hardware operates AFTER its been purchased and registered and been used. Its not that it was altered before you purchased it, it was altered after you purchased it thats my primary issue with DJI. And probably many other's too. Those who fly commercially are additionally burdened after their purchase. It was working fine, now its not is a common thread here post FW patches. Just search. You will see.
So, do you own your car/truck/trailer? Or did you buy USAGE rights for it? Its hardware. It runs on software. It has computer controls. Its capable of terrorist activities. Its capable of breaking the law. Do YOU own it or did you buy USAGE rights to it?
Imagine this. You bought a new Ford pickup last year. And you have been happily driving it around obeying the laws. Mostly. Suddenly Ford decides to update it without your consent or worse yet with your consent but didn't disclose the REAL reason for the "update", and suddenly in Minnesota, the truck won't drive anywhere but on freeways and primary streets and it will only do so at the posted speed limit and no more. You can no longer go any faster than posted limits. And you can't drive it out in a farm field to pick up hay. And apparently Ford screwed up some areas and it only does 55mph when the posted limit there is 70mph. Oh, and now you have to ask Ford "Mother May I" to go out in your field to pick up some hay. And it takes several days to get a reply. And now you have to play that "Mother May I" game everywhere you go with "your" truck. But Ford did it in the interest of public safety. They did it to protect you. They did it because driving faster than the limit is illegal. Right?
That is the point. You own the truck right? It operated as you anticipated. You used it within reason. But now, your truck isn't your truck anymore. Ford gets to say where you drive it and how fast it can go.
Ford's stance is that because your truck COULD be used in a way that it becomes dangerous for public safety, they have the responsibility to lock it down.
Now replace Ford with DJI, and truck with drone and speeds with altitudes and farm fields with NFZs.
My stance is that i bought my cars/trucks. I drive them the places I want to. I drive them at the speeds I want to. I drive them the way I want to. And if I cause an accident, Cadillac nor Pontiac go to jail. I do. I don't expect Ruger, or Winchester or Smith&Wesson, or Sig, or Barrett to go to jail if I abuse my guns. I expect no less with my drones, nor my RC planes and helis in the past. If I fly them such that they cause harm or break the law, _I_ am responsible, not DJI or whoever made the drone. And I resent any company who tries to tell me otherwise. It is NOT for MY own good. Its for THEIR own good. None of this is to keep me safe. Its to keep lawyers and governments off DJI's *** so they can keep racking in the clams.
What happens when my drone auto lands from this firmware and lands on a highway, or heaven forbid on a person or something of the sorts
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2017
- Messages
- 111
- Reaction score
- 83
- Age
- 65
Unlike communists? DJI is a Chinese company subject to communist law. It is in fact a communist corporation.Because, unlike communists, DJI believes that the industry should self-regulate to prevent government regulation
It's in DJI's business interest to be seen as a "good citizen", given that they are by far the #1 player and almost every time there's a negative headline it's a DJI drone. You can agree or disagree with their approach, but it makes a lot of business sense to ensure that the authorities see them as a safe player. If one day Canada decided to regulate drones even more, and only drones with those limitations are legal, DJI will have the market to themselves
Want to own your drone? Build an Arducopter based one, and you can do anything you want. It'll cost more and offer less integration (not to mention clunkier hardware), but you own it
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2017
- Messages
- 111
- Reaction score
- 83
- Age
- 65
Don't sue, stop complaining and act. Hit them where it hurts. In the $$$$. That's what I'm doing - www.dji-advocacy.com. Just got it going with plans to start driving traffic there by the end of August. Will be a work in progress. I no longer buy DJI but can't let this go any longer in the US. If I can't do anything to force a policy change I'm planning to work to run them out of the US market. The communist ideal must have limits in the US. DJI is violating privacy law, consumer law and may even be a national security risk. Who know what this Chinese company is doing with all that data and hi-res imagery.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2017
- Messages
- 987
- Reaction score
- 303
You aren't allowed to hack and airplanes either. WHY? Cause it flies over others who have no control over what flies over their heads. Even a falling drone can can damage or an accident.
There are rules for riding a bike or flying a hang glider, RC aircraft all have rules, you have to accept that.
I stated in an earlier thread, regulate yourselves within the rules or prepare to be regulated.
BQ
There are rules for riding a bike or flying a hang glider, RC aircraft all have rules, you have to accept that.
I stated in an earlier thread, regulate yourselves within the rules or prepare to be regulated.
BQ
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2017
- Messages
- 111
- Reaction score
- 83
- Age
- 65
Cars are not regulated in such a manner and can cause much more damage. DJI has no business attempting to regulate its users at the level they are. Won't matter, they'll lose market share with in the next 2 years. Many alternatives are becoming available. A superior product can't float a company with no customer appreciation, horrible service and overbearing control of the product.
Opinion: DJI has abandoned professionals
Similar threads
- Locked
