Spyke

And how should this switch be operated, and by who?

It's hard to imagine a kill switch for a communications device meant to be used for rendering a stolen device inaccessible or useless being misused by anyone with power anywhere in the world. At all.

Ever.

5

When you create the ability to brick phones you create the ability to mass-brick phones. Imagine a totalitarian regime seeing an uprising on the horizon and bricking the phones of protesters that attended some protest. Imagine hackers or three -letter agencies getting this ability wanting to disrupt the economy of a town, city, or country. I wouldn't be opposed to someone having software on their phone to remote brick it. I'd be surprised if something like that didn't already exist. It's government mandating a backdoor that's the problem.

6

Because the authorities could then brick anyone's phone at any time. Including rich people and corporations that could hire security consultants to manage hackers to do it.

3

Because it’s the police’s responsibility to stop the snatchers in the first place? Not insist that other companies make up for their lack of results.

It’s not a COMPLETELY terrible idea, I know Apple already bricks stolen phones upon request, but at the owner’s expense. It’s still the people hired to solve the problem passing the responsibility on to others.

2

That's already the goal of factory reset protection...

Though there's ways to bypass FRP. And ultimately always will be.

1

You reached the end

Met police chief calls for law to make stolen phones ‘unusable bricks’ | Spyke