Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Move to scrap Galaxy Note 7 !!!
...altogether!!
Samsung under fire - so is Samsung Pay
[With this big hit and probable scrapping of the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 it appears that there is one less alternative to the credit card - at least in the short term. And a good thing too. Here is a classic example of the sexy technology leaving much to be desired, and leaving customers out in the cold (save from the heat of their burning phones). It goes to show that the sexy things are not the best things when we consider alternatives to credit cards. In this example Samsung has failed to provide a tap'n'go facility for its customers through Samsung Pay and as such its has failed to defeat the credit card. We should all continue to build resilience in our credit cards and more robust barriers to financial and identity fraud, through the activities of companies such as Smartmetric.]
Samsung Electronics Co slashed its quarterly profit estimate by a third on Wednesday, soaking up a $2.3 billion hit from ditching its flagship smartphone in what could be one of the costliest product safety failures in tech history.
Quantifying the financial pain of Tuesday's move to scrap the Galaxy Note 7 smartphone after a global recall and weeks of mounting problems, the world's top smartphone maker said it expects its July-September operating profit was 5.2 trillion won ($4.7 billion), down from the 7.8 trillion won it estimated five days ago.
Samsung said in a statement the 2.6 trillion won ($2.3 billion) guidance cut reflects the sales and earning impact it currently expects from the decision to permanently halt sales of the $882 Note 7 device. Its third-quarter revenue estimate was also cut to 47 trillion won from 49 trillion won previously.
The new earnings guidance is 30 percent below third-quarter 2015's operating profit, and left investors and analysts pondering the longer impact on Samsung's brand and earnings. Rival suppliers of smartphones that use the Android operating system, like Samsung's, stand to benefit if the Note 7 damage drive consumers elsewhere.
"It's possible there could be additional profit impact in the fourth quarter but it likely won't be as large as the third quarter," said Park Jung-hoon, a fund manager at HDC Asset Management, which owns shares in Samsung. "I think it's possible for fourth-quarter profits to come in as much as the high 7 trillion won range."
Samsung shares ended down 0.7 percent on Wednesday, with the Seoul market closing before the earnings guidance cut was announced.
HDC's Park said the initial guidance issued last week likely already factored in a 1 trillion won profit impact, putting the total third-quarter earnings hit at around 3.6 trillion won. While this was a major blow, he said some investors had feared the profit impact could be as large as 5 trillion won this year.
BILLION-DOLLAR BUYBACK?
Samsung shares have already fallen 10 percent this week and are on track for their biggest weekly decline since May 2012, having touched a one-month low of 1.494 million won as investors worried the Note 7 crisis could inflict long-term damage on Samsung's reputation and earnings.
Some investors said Samsung may need to return more cash to shareholders, either through a dividend or additional buybacks, to calm market jitters. HDC's Park said the cash-rich firm may need to announce a buyback of between 2 trillion won and 3 trillion won in order to mollify shareholders whose nerves have been jangled.
The tech giant announced the recall of 2.5 million Note 7s in early September following reports of the phones catching fire. The firm appeared to have the situation under control as it issued replacement devices with different batteries, until new phones also began to smoke and combust.
Investors and analysts agreed that the damage to Samsung's brand and future earnings would deepen the longer the market was left in the dark about the origin of the fault. Some have already predicted lost revenue in the region of $17 billion for Samsung.
"There needs to be explanation from Samsung in order for consumers to understand that problems won't occur in the next models...Samsung needs to clearly explain and admit what went wrong," said IBK Asset Management fund manager Kim Hyun-su. The asset manager owns shares in Samsung.
Samsung would likely push ahead to get the latest version of its premium S-series smartphones to market as soon as possible, fund managers said. Typically, the South Korean company unveils a new Galaxy S phone on the sidelines of the Mobile World Congress tech trade show in the first quarter as it battles Apple Inc to stay at the top of the smartphone market.
'DAMAGE CONTROL'
Experts are baffled by what could be causing the overheating in the replacement phones, if not the batteries, and Samsung has not commented.
An official at the Korean Agency for Technology and Standards, which is investigating the problem alongside Samsung, said the fault in the replacement devices might not be the same as the problem in the original product. The official asked not to be identified as he was not authorized to speak publicly.
Aviation authorities and airlines around the world are telling passengers to switch off their Note 7s and keep them out of checked baggage, amid fears they could bring down a plane.
"Damage control at Samsung will face an uphill battle to redeem the company's tarnished image owing to the dangerous and dramatic nature of the phone's failure," Vijay Michalik, an analyst at research firm Frost & Sullivan, said.
While the damage to Samsung's brand, if not its earnings, remains hard to quantify, negative publicity from the botched recall could touch off a turf war among Android smartphone manufacturers, analysts said.
Consumers tend to commit to their choice between Apple's iOS operating system and Google's Android, leaving Samsung's fellow Android manufacturers such as LG Electronics Inc and Alphabet Inc's Google in prime position to strike.
Samsung goes from bad to worse
More questions for Samsung - Not the batteries??
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/technology/samsung-faces-new-questions-about-galaxy-note-7-recall/news-story/6599518089e53c593635f1009d34233b?nk=62e3fb1c19109e00bce907657f23fe81-1476136784
[I made it clear that I would continue to post articles from open-sourced media that highlighted problems with technology that seeks to replace the credit card - technology that appears sexy and a time saver to many, but which continue have troubles and unreliable service that is far from that promised by these companies, and which create situations that are unsafe and which might leave the user without any means to pay for anything - if indeed they choose Apple Pay or Samsung Pay. That is what has recently been occurring with both Apply and Samsung devices. I did not create those problems but I believe these technologies are not intrinsically safe from financial and identity fraud and they are simply not dependable enough for the user for a number of reasons, such as not being able to be charged or carried in certain places.
Now we have a situation where it may indeed be a problem create by something other than the batteries! Samsung halting production. What will you do without your Samsung Pay? How about you use the old credit card and stop trying to appear sexy and hurried in life - too hurried to ensure you properly transact your business?
And for breaking news - I am travelling in a country environment right now. Due to bad weather there are some tower outages and I'm left with no phone coverage at all. Thankfully I have my good old credit card that I can use to buy stuff rather than relying on phone tap'n'go rubbish technology!
Lets try to build resilience into our credit cards, like Smartmetric says its trying to do.]
Samsung Electronics’ decision to halt production of its supposedly safe Galaxy Note 7 replacements is raising doubts about the South Korean technology giant’s initial assertion that fires in some of the original devices were the fault of one battery supplier.
The company has temporarily halted production of its troubled Galaxy Note 7, according to a person familiar with the matter, a little more than a month after announcing a global recall of 2.5 million smartphones. Samsung said yesterday that it was “temporarily adjusting the Galaxy Note 7 production schedule in order to take further steps to ensure quality and safety matters,” without elaborating.
When reports of battery irregularities began arising over the replacement phones, the company initially played them down. But now, the acknowledgment of potential problems turns a spotlight on whether the smartphone maker’s original diagnosis was correct.
Although Samsung has pinned the blame on one of its battery suppliers, battery experts and analysts say it is possible the Galaxy Note 7’s reported woes are the result of another component in the smartphone and not simply the battery itself.
Possible problems include the battery’s voltage control system and low-quality materials that go inside a battery cell, said Venkat Viswanathan, an assistant professor of mechanical engineering at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh.
“Lithium-ion batteries have a very small failure rate,” he said.
In complex devices such as smartphones, “You can do 499 things right out of 500, but if you make that one error, that phone is going to be problematic,” said Daniel Kim, a Seoul-based analyst for Macquarie.
Samsung hasn’t named the battery supplier, but people familiar with the matter say it is Samsung SDI, an affiliate of the smartphone maker. Samsung SDI has declined to comment about its role in the recall and repeated that stance yesterday.
Samsung said it immediately would stop sourcing its batteries from the problematic supplier for its Galaxy Note 7 replacements, diverting orders instead to another supplier — Amperex Technology, a unit of Japanese electronic-parts maker TDK Corp — it said didn’t share those problems.
Samsung’s short turnaround to churn out new replacement phone also may have strained the company’s other battery supplier, said Cho Jae-phil, director for the Future Batteries Research Center, which is overseen by Samsung SDI and South Korea’s Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology.
“More quality issues can surface when you have a supplier trying to mass produce batteries in a short amount of time,” Mr Cho said.
Some angry consumers are questioning whether Samsung was too hasty in rushing to push replacement devices into the market.
“You need time for reliability testing to make sure that the same problem doesn’t happen again,” said Ngo Yit Sung, a 35-year-old investor-relations consultant in Singapore who bought a Galaxy Note 7 smartphone in August.
Mr Ngo, a former electrical engineer at Altera, a US microchip company owned by Intel Corp, said his replacement phone has been overheating while charging, and he said he won’t leave the room while his phone is charging.
“If you came back to me in one month and said your device was problem free, that wouldn’t make sense to me,” he said.
Mr Ngo has pressed Samsung to offer a refund for his phone, though in Singapore, Samsung is offering consumers only a trade-in for another Galaxy Note 7 phone.
Samsung declined to comment on speculation about specific technical problems with the Galaxy Note 7 replacements.
Regardless of the problem’s source, concerns about Samsung’s replacement devices increase uncertainty about whether the company ever will be able to profit from its once-promising Galaxy Note 7.
When the phone was introduced in early August at a splashy event in Midtown Manhattan, some reviewers hailed it as Samsung’s best-ever smartphone. Preorders from consumers poured in, and the stock reached a record high, partly in anticipation for strong Galaxy Note 7 sales.
Now, with just weeks to go until Black Friday and the Christmas shopping season, and Galaxy Note 7 production halted, the focus already is turning toward next year’s flagship smartphone, the Galaxy S8, which is expected to be introduced in February.
Samsung’s Galaxy S series is the company’s most important product line-up, and analysts credit the continued strong success of this year’s Galaxy S7 for Samsung’s robust third-quarter earnings.
“The damage would have been worse if the recall was made for the S series,” said SR Kwon, an analyst at Dongbu Securities in Seoul, noting that Samsung sells about three times as many Galaxy S smartphones as Galaxy Note devices.
In the larger picture, analysts say, the electronics giant’s diversification — it is the world’s largest maker by shipments of televisions and memory chips, in addition to smartphones — means the company is able to weather pain in one segment of its business with strong results in others.
Brisk sales of semiconductors and display panels appear to have helped Samsung in the most recent quarter. But the broader concern is that the fumbling of the phone recall is inflicting lasting damage to the company’s brand.
Apple Pay no better - not touchy
Apple Pay no more reliable
[Here we have the so-called sexiest of them all that is so capricious. How can you reliably use this technology to pay your bills at the grocery store, the airport, the taxi fare, or even the product you want to replace this TOUCHY device? With the Apple 6's so diseased and the company not addressing the issues (per the commentary in this article) I am left to wonder about the capacity of this sexy technology to live up to its promise to offer infallible access to Apple Pay functions on the devices. How then will you pay for anything? Let's just stay with our credit cards that work properly, and try to make them more robust in the face of global fraud crime....like Smartmetric says its trying to achieve.]
With the iPhone 7 already on the market, is Apple’s decision to keep silent over iPhone 6 units experiencing touch disease and units exploding and catching fire their way to push patrons to upgrade?
It’s been a while since the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus have been introduced to the market, but thousands, maybe even millions, of people all over the world are still very much attached to their iPhone 6 units. However, it’s also been an outstanding issue that while a number still keep their iPhone 6 or iPhone 6 Plus units, a significant fraction of this number is plagued by what many would call the iPhone 6 “touch disease.”
We previously reported in September that thousands of iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 users are experiencing this touch disease. The iPhone 6 touch disease pertains to when the user observes reduced responsiveness or the complete malfunction of the iPhone 6’s touchscreen, more often coupled with a series of gray bars on top of the screen.
The iPhone 6 touch disease has been so widespread that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Apple.
The iPhone 6 touch disease lawsuit has gained more momentum as three law firms join the outstanding class action lawsuit against Apple. Vice has been following the iPhone 6 touch disease for sometime now and a recent report confirms that several plaintiffs and three separate law firms have been added to the legal battle. In fact, Vice notes that Richard McCune, an attorney at the California-based McCuneWright law firm who is representing plaintiffs in the California suit, revealed that nearly 10,000 people have contacted his firm, asking to specifically join the iPhone 6 touch disease lawsuit.
“Each of the firms (who had their own clients) brings strength to the case, including Stephen Larson of Larson O’Brien, who is a former Federal Judge. With these firms working with us, we believe it gives us the best chance of obtaining a positive result in the case for the owners of the phones.”
It’s also alarming that already five current and former Apple Geniuses have confirmed to Vice staff writer Jason Koebler that Apple is well aware of the iPhone 6 touch disease problem, but will not tell customers about it.
Vice is only one among a handful of media organizations who have reached out to Apple for a comment regarding the iPhone 6 touch disease issue but has failed to receive any semblance of an answer. The only answer we ever got from Apple was a September 20th filing in the Utah case which requests for an extension of time to respond to the Complaint. 9to5Mac reported that Apple lawyers wrote the following in the filing.
“Given the similarity between the [Utah] and [California] actions, it would unnecessarily tax judicial resources if these actions were to proceed in separate class action lawsuits—especially where the [Utah] and [California] Plaintiffs purport to represent the same putative class of all consumers who purchased an iPhone 6 or 6 Plus.”
Why should Apple push consumers to pay $329 to replace their touch disease-ridden iPhone 6 Plus with a refurbished model that will only experience the same problem in a matter of weeks? With the refusal to comment, Apple is only proving that this is all a money-making scheme and they do not, in any way, care about customer service nor quality.
In addition to the touch disease cases, two cases of iPhone 6 units catching on fire have been reported this week alone. The first incident, 6ABC reported, was an iPhone 6 Plus which suddenly caught on fire while snugly resting on a student’s pocket. Darin Hlavaty, a student at Rowan College at Burlington County, shared.
“I felt this crazy, hot burning in my leg. Right as class was starting, my phone started smoking in my pocket. It was a fire. It was super hot so I flinched, grabbed it, threw it on the ground. Had to kick it because it was on fire.”
Another incident came via ABC30, which reports another iPhone 6 Plus exploding and then bursting into flames on her dresser, damaging two Apple watch stands and a pair of glasses.
Will Apple ever face these issues plaguing the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus units or will they keep ignoring the pleas of the owners and wait until all of these get buried under another iPhone that they will release?
It could be your 8 year old child
Another Galaxy Note 7 goes up in spoke
[I wonder how all the sexy ones would feel if it was their sexy technology that went up in spoke this time, nearly injuring an 8 year old girl. And now of course you would not be able to use this sexy technology to Samsung Pay your way through the day. How can you expect to use this type of technology when it does not work reliably? How can you have any faith that it will not be your device that explodes or smokes up the joint next time? And then how will you expect to pull the device out of your pocket and pay for the groceries or the plane ticket, or Gee, even the medical bills that accrue from using this stuff?
Why don't we stay with credit cards that do not explode? Make them more resilient, like Smartmetric says its trying to do... more resilient to financial fraud and identity fraud.]
Another replacement Samsung Galaxy Note 7 has caught fire, this one in Houston, Texas. Daniel Franks was at lunch with his daughter and wife when their replacement caught fire while sitting on the table, he told The Verge in an interview. It had been replaced at a Best Buy store in late September.
Franks said that his eight-year old daughter regularly plays Minecraft on the phone and wondered what could have happened if she was holding it or it was in his pocket or sitting on a nightstand.
This is the (1, 2, 3, 4) fifth replacement Note 7 that has caught fire in the US in the past week that we know of. It seems likely that there are more. AT&T has stopped selling the phones entirely, while the US Consumer Product Safety Commission says it is "moving expeditiously" to investigate, though perhaps even that isn’t quickly enough.
For it’s part, Samsung has issued a statement saying it is investigating the fires, though it has yet to determine that a "product safety issue exists." It’s possible that Samsung is letting US regulators take the lead on the investigation after it was criticized for launching its initial recall of the Note 7 without going through the CPSC.
"We are working diligently with authorities and third party experts and will share findings when we have completed the investigation," said a Samsung spokesperson in a statement to The Verge. "Even though there are a limited number of reports, we want to reassure customers that we are taking every report seriously. If we determine a product safety issue exists, Samsung will take immediate steps approved by the CPSC to resolve the situation."
If you own a Samsung Galaxy Note 7 you should immediately stop using it and return it for a refund — all the major US carriers will exchange the phone, regardless of purchase date. We don’t know why Samsung hasn’t been more forthcoming about what’s going on with these replacement devices, but it doesn’t really matter. Until we get more information, the simplest explanation is the best one: The Samsung Galaxy Note 7 is a fundamentally defective product and it should be pulled from the market without delay.
EVACUATE THE PLANE - SAMSUNG GALAXY 7
Evacuate the plane: by Samsung
[And so the story continues...Samsung Pay would not work on this device - so lets all use the credit card. No chance that this phone would allow Samsung Pay to operate. This is why choosing this sexy technology is so risky. Surely it would be safer (injury and damage) and safer (operational risk) to stay with a credit card like the type Smartmetric says it is producing. You cannot carry around one item that does absolutely everything for you in life - what a silly thought. You cannot have a credit card that makes phone calls either - how silly a thought. That these companies try to compete with credit cards is evermore ridiculous. That this event involved one of the phones that was a REPLACEMENT for the first batch of flawed products is ridiculous.]
A replacement Samsung Galaxy Note 7 has forced a flight to evacuate, raising questions about whether even the replacements are safe. Samsung recalled the Galaxy note 7 in mid-September after dozens of complaints of the device catching fire.
The Samsung Galaxy Note 7 situation is getting more and more serious. Between children getting burned and fires getting started, Samsung has caused some serious havoc. The latest chapter in the saga? A smoking Galaxy Note 7 forced a Southwest flight to evacuate.
The real kicker to this story is that the Galaxy Note 7 in question wasn’t an old model — it was one of the replacement models. What that means is that even replacement Galaxy Note 7 phones could be at risk of exploding. Obviously, that’s not good for Samsung.
Thankfully, no one was injured in this particular incident, and the plane actually wasn’t even in the air yet — it was still boarding. But the story suggests that Samsung’s nightmare might not be over just yet. The company, however, is skeptical.
“We are working with the authorities and Southwest now to recover the device and confirm the cause,” said Samsung in a statement.
Still, a report from The Verge confirms that it was indeed a replacement device — Brian Green, who owned the phone, says that he had it replaced at an AT&T store on September 21. The Verge also got a picture of the phone’s box, showing a black square symbol that confirms it’s a replacement device. Green also says that device had a green battery icon, indicating that it’s safe to use.
Samsung officially recalled Galaxy Note 7 phones sold before September 15 a few weeks ago, after it was revealed that the devices were at serious risk of catching fire due to a battery flaw. The recall was issued after Samsung received 92 reports of Galaxy Note 7 batteries overheating; 26 of those cases resulting in burns, and 55 in property damage of some kind. In some cases there were even fires in cars and in garages. In this instance, the device caused minor damage to the plane’s carpet.
Apple Pay just not working - still
Apple 7 breaking apart - connection issues?
Apple 6s Plus explodes in New Zealand
Apple 7 catching fire - again?
[A whole host of open-source media in recent days about the Apple iPhone 6 & 7 that do not cut it.
They do not cut it 'cos the they explode, burst apart, smoke, expand, and still are not a safe alternative to your credit cards.
I prefer to invest my money and emotions in supporting companies that say they will improve credit cards, such as Smartmetric.
My credit card has never exploded or caused any damage or injury.
The ONLY time my credit card failed is when I over-spent and had nothing left on the credit limit.
How much more evidence you you want me to produce to convince you that sexy technology does not work?
The Samsung Pay and the Apple Pay options are fraught with safety issues, privacy issues and poor technology.
This poor technology does not support the intent of the time-poor group that seemingly do not have the time to use their credit cards properly, in a way that reduces the risk of financial and identity fraud, and who simply want to transfer the risk to someone else. Not me.]
One Stop Shop for Hackers - Smartphone
[I draw your attention to the the second paragraph in particular. Why would anyone wish to substitute a credit card for technology on smartphones? It is commonly reported that this technology is not safe, not secure, and open to so much risk...risk of hacking by criminal elements the world over - criminals that seek to commit identity fraud and financial fraud, and leave you all as victims. I am continually surprised that so many people wish to be victims - just to add their names to the sexy cohort and in the name of expediency. But one way or another these people will be disappointed. You will be disappointed because of risk of fraud, because your phone cannot be charged in airports, because you cannot carry them on aircraft, because they will not be charged when you want to use it as a quasi credit card, because they explode and cause injury to people and damage to property.
I prefer to support credit cards and companies like Smartmetric that say they are all about building resilience into credit cards. I will continue to use my credit card if you don't mind, and to leave that so-called sexy technology for the past.
I do not want a credit card that can make phone calls. How silly would that be !!??
I do not want a credit card to be a calendar, or a note taker and maker.
I do not want a credit card to be a camera or video recorder either.
I just want it to be a credit card - a substitute for cash and credit.
I prefer my credit card for all kinds of privacy reasons too, and I have touched on them before.
I shall continue to alert you to the dangers and shortcomings of this particular technology that will disappoint well into the future and which seeks to compete with Smartmetric.
I shall continue to seek out media reports of this kind and post that information here.]
[I cannot post the link to this site but here is the text]
10 Must-Have Privacy & Security Apps for iPhone 7
New York, NY - September 27, 2016 - (Newswire.com)
?The new iPhone 7 comes with exciting new features: it’s now waterproof, has a longer battery life and a better camera, among other things. The new phone also comes with a convenient private data transfer - when a user acquires a new phone, their passwords, history of visited sites, information exchanged on messaging apps and other data are transferred from the old device to the new one.
Convenient as it might be, a new smartphone is now an attractive one-stop location for hackers, who’d like to access all the important information: personal bank account data, credit card passwords, name, address, social media accounts and so on.
What happens when someone’s personal information is stolen? According to Javelin Strategy & Research firm, one out of three times it’s used for identity theft. When someone's identity is stolen, their money could be taken off their checking account or credit card at any time. Worst of all, most victims of identity theft are left to take care of the debts incurred, and to deal with a ruined credit.
It’s no coincidence that privacy and security apps have been rising in popularity among smartphone users. Here are security boosting tools for the iPhone 7:
Secure Messaging Apps. In order to communicate safely on a smartphone, Tor Messenger ?is a convenient solution. Tor Messenger is launched by Tor Project creators, who offer the world’s most popular encrypted Internet browser, synonymous with “the dark web.” Tor Messenger is a cross-platform chat app that is secure by default and sends all messages over Tor Network. The app supports a good number of transport networks, such as IRC, Google Talk, Facebook Chat, Yahoo, and others, and enables Off-The-Record (OTR) messaging - a safe and encrypted way to have private conversations - over Tor’s network of computers for greater anonymity. Signal is an encrypted messaging and voice calling app that provides end-to-end encryption to secure all communications. The app can also verify the identity of people one is messaging with and the integrity of the channel they are using. When texting with non-Signal users, one has an option to invite them to an encrypted conversation via Signal.
Password Security apps. It’s always advised to change passwords in order to stay safe online, and that means having to use a unique password for each site or account. Those who work in teams, often experience a password issue: there are just too many passwords to remember for all the accounts, and it might feel like a full time job to keep every account secure. As a result, many people keep the same password for almost everything. 1Password for Teams (from the makers of the original 1Password) lets an entire team securely log in with only one single password, as the app remembers all the real passwords. The data is encrypted before any information leaves a device. A new product is 1Password for Families that allows a family to share passwords, credit cards, and other sensitive information. The app remembers everything, keeps the information safe and signs one into their favorite sites with one click.
Internet encryption Apps. Those who aim to keep all their online activity private, should get a VPN for their phone. A VPN creates a connection tunnel that automatically encrypts all the data coming in and out of a device, secures the Internet traffic, and effectively protects anyone using the Internet. NordVPN (Virtual Private Network provider), which has a reputation of offering a military-grade protection, is fast and easy to use. The developers at NordVPN have launched a powerful new app for iPhone that is also intuitive and good-looking. The new iOS app re-routes and encrypts all Internet traffic making the connection private and secured while using top of the line security protocol IKEv2/IPsec.
Email Security Apps. Industrial espionage is getting more and more sophisticated, leading to billions in damages. That’s why everyone needs a secure app that will encrypt all emails. M for iOS, also known as Mynigma, is a strange-sounding app that evokes James Bond’s boss. The app provides automatic end-to-end encryption directly on the device, not in the cloud. It allows users to easily manage keys and can be used across devices. The ZeroEmail App is a self-learning email app created to organize the inbox by relevance or importance. It has an original card-style format that allows for single swiping, making it quite fast and easy. Zero does not store messages and personal information on remote servers, meaning it all stays on the phone.
iPhone data security apps. Keeply is a spy-level app for an average user. It stores a user's private moments and data - pins, credit cards, notes, photos and videos - right on the phone. Although the idea itself is not particularly new, Keeply’s strong features make it a refreshing app. For example, it provides a Fake Pin feature, which is alternate password that the user can give to their nosy friends or family - when they enter it, the app shows an empty application. Face-down Lock, on the other hand, causes Keeply to close immediately when it's placed face down. It can also take a photo of anyone who enters a wrong pin into the phone. Best of all: nothing ever leaves the phone. Besides, it’s aesthetically-pleasing and easy to use.
Paired device lock apps. iPhone security apps can go one step further than smartphone’s protection - these apps can also save a user's computer, remotely. When a user gets up from their desk and go for a coffee, they might suddenly remember that they have left their work computer with some private windows open. LockItUp app allows to simply lock a PC or Mac from anywhere by using iPhone. It’s all cloud-based, so there's no need to be on the same Wi-Fi or network for it to work. The app runs in the background quietly and consumes very little CPU. Another similar app is Knock 2.0: when a user wants to lock their Mac, they just need to pull out their iPhone and knock on it twice, even if it’s in the pocket. That’s all it takes. It’s ideal for Apple Watch users, too - after a fingerprint is provided, a user can lock or unlock their Mac with just one tap.
These are just a few of the many powerful new apps that are being launched to protect private information. They come right on time, as identity theft statistics grow all the time.
Each year, almost every person gets affected by at least one hacking attempt, and over a billion of personal records get accessed illegally. This year alone, hackers have broken into accounts of major public figures, such as Mark Zuckerberg, hijacked a computer network of Hillary Clinton’s campaign, stole $65 million worth of cryptocurrency from a Bitcoin exchange and accessed more than 330,000 cash registers at restaurants, hotels and stores.
If major public figures and companies are vulnerable to attacks, every user must make sure that at least the information that they can control - that is stored on their smartphones - is safe and secure.
iPhone radiation & exploding Samsungs
iPhone radiation
[Well I don't know what to believe. There is far too much argy-bargy going on between the two companies to believe the research findings about which has the higher amount of radiation.
What I can say for certain is that my credit card does NOT emit radiation. On that basis alone I think I will stay with my credit card and invest emotionally and with funding to support those companies that wish to strengthen security around credit cards, rather than invest anything in technology that purports to be sexy and time-saving and safe - none of which has proven to be true thus far.]
APPLE’S iPhone emits twice as much radiation as Samsung handsets, according to a new report.
Apple’s main competitor in the smartphone market is Samsung and the two companies are constantly trying to get the edge over the other.
The South Korean tech giant recently admitted to rushing the release of its latest Galaxy Note 7 to beat Apple’s iPhone to market, which the company says contributed to an exploding battery issue that forced a global recall.
While Apple has largely got the better of the smart phone wars in the past decade, radiation emissions may be one area where Samsung takes the cake.
Apple’s iPhones and iPads had the highest electromagnetic radiation specific absorption rate, known as SAR, out of electronic devices sold in South Korea, reports tech website ZDNet.
However there is a reason to take the finding with a grain of salt because the figures have come from a state-backed study in South Korea — a government which in the past has shown a tendency to support its business sector under dubious circumstances.
Nonetheless according to the data from the country’s National Radio Research Agency the average radiation SAR for iPhones was 1.166 watts per kilogram (W/kg).
In comparison the handset released by Samsung this year showed an average SAR recording of 0.517W/kg.
In both the United States and South Korea, the SAR limit for devices is 1.6 W/kg, so the iPhone is still well under the regulated limit.
The US Federal Communication Commission says anything under 1.6 W/kg is considered perfectly safe, but notes there is still further research to be done when considering the prevalence of radiofrequency (RF) energy in an increasingly wireless world.
“Those evaluating the potential risks of using wireless devices agree that more and longer-term studies should explore whether there is a better basis for RF safety standards than is currently used,” the US government body says.
There is scant evidence to suggest that consumers should be worried about the level of radiation emitted by their electronic devices such as phones, but it hasn’t stopped some companies from trying to capitalise on the largely unfounded fears.
Australian company Lif3 has produced a smartphone chip which it says is proven to reduce mobile phone radio exposure by up to 95 per cent.
Why? Because the company believes that “the mobile phone safety movement is spreading around the world”.
Whether that’s true or not depends on who you ask, but maybe Samsung wishes it were.
Samsung Galaxy Note 7 - Chinese not happy
New info with every post
[Another event - this whole story is catching fire around the world ('though has nothing to do with Katniss Everdeen). Another Samsung phone catches fire and injures a poor unsuspecting consumer, within 24hrs of receiving the brand new product. And now the company is trying to divert responsibility away from its product and blaming external heat sources.....hhhmmm - stayed tuned for more on this I guess.....but you'd believe a power such as Samsung wouldn't you!!??
I trust this poor victim will never again attempt to use this so-called sexy technology to be a substitute for his credit card. I won't either, because I will do what I can to improve the security and ease of use for credit card consumers, just like Smartmetric says it is trying to do.]
A Chinese man has reported that a Note 7 smartphone from Samsung Electronics exploded after he bought it this week, raising questions about whether the South Korean company's problems with battery fires are spreading to newer versions of the premium device.
The 25-year-old customer, Hui Renjie, said his Note 7 exploded Monday morning, less than 24 hours after he got it delivered from e-commerce website JD.com.
He said the incident caused minor injuries to two of his fingers and burned his Apple MacBook. A Samsung representative visited him soon afterwards and asked to take away the phone, he said. But he declined the offer because he doesn't trust the company to reveal the reason for the fire, and plans to publicise the issue.
"We are currently contacting the customer and will conduct a thorough examination of the device in question once we receive it," the Korean company said in an e-mailed statement.
Samsung has been engulfed in perhaps the worst crisis in its corporate history after Note 7 smartphones began to burst into flames just days after hitting the market last month.
The Suwon-based company announced on September 2 that it would replace all 2.5 million phones sold globally at that point. Samsung said it had uncovered the cause of the battery fires and that it was certain new phones wouldn't have the same flaws.
The latest China incident however raises the prospect that Samsung has battery problems with Note 7 phones now hitting the market, adding the risk of further recalls and potential brand damage. Analysts have estimated that the original recall would cost the company $US1 billion ($1.30 billion) to $US2 billion.
The sporadic reports of phones bursting into flames are unlikely to do its business any favours in China, where it's already slipped out of the top five and lost market share Huawei, Xiaomi and other manufacturers.
Samsung examined two Note 7 devices bought online in China this month that ignited in users' hands, but determined that heat had been applied from an external source and that batteries weren't the cause of the fires.
Local media have also criticised the Korean company's decision to mostly exclude the world's largest smartphone arena from its global recall, saying that Note 7s sold there used different batteries that weren't prone to overheating.
"Samsung's business in China will only get worse," said Greg Roh, an analyst at HMC Investment Securities in Seoul. "Samsung may have to sacrifice massive marketing costs in China to win back its customers."
The original Note 7 fires came after Samsung decided to rush the device to market to take advantage of what Korean executives thought would be a mediocre iPhone 7 from Apple, Bloomberg News reported last week.
Top executives were convinced the Note would dazzle consumers and they pushed suppliers to meet unusually tight deadlines, despite loads of new features, people familiar with the matter said.
Samsung drew criticism for the recall as well as the battery fires. The company announced replacement plans publicly before working out how millions of consumers in 10 countries would actually get replacements.
Consumer advocates in the US voiced concerns that Samsung's lack of coordination with regulators risked causing confusion.
On Tuesday, Samsung said that 60 per cent of the recalled Note 7s had been exchanged in the US and South Korea. About 90 per cent of users had chosen to replace their recalled devices with a new Note 7, the company said
iPhone VR - its all virtual
Occipital is bringing room-scale VR to your phone, and that’s a big deal
iPhone VR
[I could not have said it better myself. Yep - iPhones offer Virtual Reality. They want to be all things to all people and many of you want to yield that option. I bet many of you are the same people who bleated long and loud about the Australia Card and its various iterations in this country and others....there is no way I'm going to hand over all my private information you said. Now you can't wait to do it - giving all your information to the world's largest health insurers with your Fitbits and the like, giving all your travel information to anyone with basic technology, allowing them to track your every footstep through your phones. And now lets all have a Virtual Reality!!? That's the world you want.
I would much rather have a phone that makes phone calls and a few other things, acknowledging there may be little I can do about tracking - but you can turn your tracker off. I would rather have a credit card that was safe and secures my hard-earned money than have my whole life in a mobile phone - a mobile phone I cannot take onto a plane, or charge in a terminal, only use to tap'n'go at a few vendors up to $100, or carry in my pocket or car for fear it will burn or explode and injure me or damage my property. Its virtually impossible to explode a credit card. Yes please leave me to my credit card and lets try to make them better for the future.]
It's inevitable that any high-volume, low-margin market is going to be filled with its fair share of crap. And sure, there's a lot of naff mobile VR out there right now, but there's also a lot of good stuff. Overall mobile is going to be key to propelling VR into the mainstream.
Which is why we're incredibly excited any time a big development happens in this space, such as Occipital's new room-scale motion tracking.
The company has released a development kit that brings room-scale tech to smartphones when paired with the company's Structure Core 3D sensor, reports UploadVR. Like the HTC Vive - undoubtedly the best example of VR room-scale tech right now - Occipital's offering lets users walk around in the virtual world as if it were the real one (albeit limited to a restricted space).
Read next: The essential guide to Oculus Touch
The thing is, the Vive is prohibitively expensive for many people who want a room-scale virtual reality experience, and though we've already started seeing the technology being brought to more affordable standalone headsets, like Intel's Project Alloy, getting it on smartphones would be a big deal.
And don't worry - Occipital's tech also includes the necessary depth sensors to stop you smacking your face into a wall.
It's also significant in that Occipital's tech is bringing more VR to iPhone users, who will be looking on enviously when Google reveals more about its Android-only Daydream platform on 4 October. Yes, there are some VR options out there for iPhones right now, but between Daydream and the Samsung Gear VR, Android users definitely have it better.
The Occipital dev kit is open now for $500, and we hope this is just a glimpse at what's next for mobile VR. Ideally Apple, Samsung and other smartphone makers will start thinking about including these technologies within the handsets themselves before long.
Another emergency due to Samsung
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/samsung-tablet-emergency-diversion-trans-atlantic-flight/story?id=42348176
[Imagine the inconvenience of being on this flight, diverting to avoid an incident on a flight. All down to the new sexy technology that so many of you think is the way forward. All down to the the sexy technology that says it can all things for all people. I don't want one thing that can supposedly do everything for me. I don't want a credit card that can supposedly make phone calls of send text messages, or be a calendar and more. And I don't want a mobile phone or tablet that is a credit card alternative either. I want my credit card to be safe from fraud so that my hard-earned money is safe from those who would try to steal it. I want my credit card available and handy when I want to use it - not reliant upon being charged safely, and there being no risk of accessibility, and no risk of insecure cloud issues. And I know that my credit card will never go up in smoke because it is overcharged - it won't hurt me or others and it won't damage any property, and it certainly won't divert planes in the air. That's why I am interested in advancing credit card technology and systems.]
A Delta flight from Detroit to Amsterdam had to be diverted to Manchester, England, for two hours Saturday into Sunday after smoke and an unknown smell developed in the passenger cabin.
A Delta official and a senior U.S. official told ABC News that the emergency on Flight 138 was caused by a Samsung tablet. The Delta official explained that the tablet fell inside a seat and became jammed after the seat either reclined or was returned to its upright position. Underneath the seat cover, the tablet and foam then started smoking, and passengers could smell a strange odor.
The flight was diverted to Manchester, where the seat was replaced. After two hours on the ground, the flight was airborne, en route to Amsterdam, where it landed at 5:11 Eastern time on Sunday.
The device that caused the emergency was apparently not the Samsung phone that is subject to recall because of a faulty battery.
The FAA is reviewing the incident.
In a statement on Monday, Samsung said, "It appears that external factors contributed to this incident. This is not related to the Galaxy Note7. We have reached out to Delta to investigate as the cause is yet to be determined."
Samsung did not immediately respond to ABC News’ request today for additional comment.
Samsung Note 2 now in question
Plane crew douse smoking Samsung phone
[Again!! And this time IN THE PLANE - in an overhead storage locker - smouldering away!! I don't want to imagine what could have happened in a worst case scenario. On the micro level though, here is another person who cannot use this sexy technology that is so revered as an alternative to credit cards. I will keep my credit card if you all don't mind too much, and attend to trying to make it better and safer in order to reduce financial and identity fraud.]
Cabin crew on an Indian passenger aircraft have used a fire extinguisher to tackle a smoking Samsung handset.
The Note 2 handset was smouldering and spitting sparks, according to a statement from airline IndiGo.
The crew's prompt action meant the aircraft landed safely at Chennai, its intended destination, said IndiGo.
The incident comes as Samsung recalls millions of new Note 7 devices because of faulty batteries.
IndiGo said no-one was hurt during the incident, on flight 6E-054 from Singapore to Chennai.
Passengers told the aircraft's cabin crew about smoke emerging from an overhead luggage compartment which, when opened, revealed the smoking phone in a piece of hand luggage, it said.
Damaged property
Once doused with an extinguisher, the sparking phone was put in a bucket of water in the plane's toilet and kept there until the aircraft landed.
"The aircraft made a normal landing at Chennai airport, and all passengers were deplaned as per normal procedure," IndiGo told Reuters.
In a statement, Samsung said: "We are aware of an incident involving one of our devices. At Samsung, customer safety is our highest priority.
"We are in touch with relevant authorities to gather more information and are looking into the matter."
Earlier this month Samsung issued a worldwide recall for its new Note 7 phones because faulty batteries can make the devices catch fire while the handset is charging or being used. Samsung is offering free replacements or refunds.
Before now, no similar problems with the older Note 2 have been reported.
The problems with the Note 7 have led many airlines to tell passengers to keep the phones turned off during a flight.
In the US, the Consumer Products Safety Commission said it had received 92 reports of faulty Note 7s overheating. Of those, 26 involved left owners with burns and 55 caused property damage.
Credit card advantages?
I can think of three straight away..
1. they do not make 'hissing' sounds when fully extended, like the new iPhone
2. when we refer to money "burning a hole in your pocket" we do not mean the credit card will actually spontaneously explode and burn through your clothing and then burn your flesh.....and then open up the card company to law suits, like the Samsung Galaxy 7s.
3. people worry so much about privacy - remember the huen cry when SMME first mentioned the card as a health card?! "You are not getting my personal details!" they shouted. These same people are happy to sign up to Apple and Samsung and all the others that both track every step they make and everywhere they go through their phones. Oh yeah, don't forget the fitbits in their various iterations from different manufacturers. You think these guys are helping? They are owned by the world's largest health insurers and are simply looking for way to increase your personal health insurance 'cos they know how unfit you are! My credit card can be used to track my purchases and assist retailers and marketers - I acknowledge that. But the credit card does not reveal how I got from one shop to the next, or one town to the next, or everywhere I was between purchases. Your phones do. So what now from those privacy folk? Ok now - 'cos its sexy to tap'n'go and I'm in a hurry?
Nuts - I see the same as you every time I shop or buy a beer and burger. I would much prefer to use my credit card as is, or even make it better through advancements, rather than try to use the very limited and unreliable sexy technology that so many people want to use these days = ApplePay and SamsungPay....they all think they are clever, but its limited by signed-up vendors and dollar amount and reliability. Its simply transferring great risk and leaves them totally exposed in so many ways. I'll stay with my credit card if you don't mind, and maintain what little privacy I can, and pay for stuff when I need to without holding everyone up 'cos I've charged my credit card.
Every mobile phone a time bomb?
Why every phone could be a ticking time bomb
About UL [UL reports that it isn't an explosion - its Thermal Runaway. Thanks for straightening that out for me UL. Now I know why I can't carry my sexy mobile phone on aircraft, and why I cannot then access my sexy technology that allows me to pay for things using my phone - after all that effort of lining up for two days and spending thousands to get the new piece of gear. Thanks UL, for pointing out why I am under such threat from this technology when the manufacturers never tell you what the risks might be. I have never owned a credit card that was susceptible to Thermal Runaway so I'll stay with my credit card for all my financial transactions if you don't mind. Perhaps we should all concentrate on making that old but workable technology (the credit card) more secure into the future than being attracted to the quick and the sexy and the convenient and the not-so-safe and no-so-secure stuff many of you promote. I will look for ways to support companies making advancements on our credit cards rather than this other sexy but deficient technology.]
This is probably going to terrify you, but you've got a ticking time bomb in your lap, or your purse, or nestled into your back pocket. If you have a consumer electronic device powered by a rechargeable battery there is a very good chance it is a lithium-based battery. Which means that when you toss your kid your phone, you're tossing them a firebomb too.
Of course the likelihood of that device actually exploding is pretty small. "Something like 1 in 10 million," Ken Boyce, a battery expert and principal engineer director at UL, says. And as Boyce notes, there are currently billions of lithium batteries out there. Two decades of improvements by engineers and material scientists, assisted by safety science gurus like those at UL, have made the nearly ubiquitous lithium battery safer. Yet the fundamental nature of lithium batteries means the potential for a weenie roaster is always there.
That was a rude awakening for consumers back in 1995. Apple launched its Powerbook 5300 that year, and was one of the earliest adopters of lithium batteries. But when the Powerbook 5300 started catching on fire and a recall was launched, it cost the company millions and tech pundits started ringing the apocalypse bell. Fortunately the tech has now improved to the point that, when Apple batteries started swelling (and sometimes catching fire) in 2007, it was merely a cause for a quiet recall.
That's why the current Samsung Note7 fiasco is so fascinating. Following many, many explosions, the Note7 is the subject of a giant global recall. It's been banned by multiple airlines, and US officials have told people to turn of the phone and stop using it forever. It certainly isn't the first phone to go boom, but a confluence of new tech, and the inherent failings central to battery technology, improved the odds of Samsung's current firestorm.
Indeed, the central cause of the explosions isn't new. Heat is the enemy of the lithium battery. Heat degrades the battery's potential to hold a charge, which is why your phone runs down faster in the heat of the summer or when you use it for an extended period of time. And on rare occasions there can be too much heat. That's when you get thermal runaway.
"Thermal runaway is the technical term for the popular term of explosion," Professor Yang Shao-Horn, the WM Keck professor of energy at MIT, says with a chuckle. Then she clarified. "It's not actually an explosion, just a fire." Thermal runaway is a chemical reaction where heat grows exponentially — which isn't good when the chemicals getting heated rapidly, like those in a lithium battery, are also highly flammable.
Lithium batteries are nothing more than a mess of very flammable chemicals smooshed together and exposed to an electrical charge via electrodes. There are two primary electrodes in a lithium battery, the anode and the cathode (think the plus and minus sign on your AA battery). Energy goes in through the anode and out through the cathode and the two components are separated by an organic material that holds lithium salts — which is a fantastic element for efficient energy containment and transfer.
If the anode and the cathode experience contact with one another, then a thermal runaway can occur. Early lithium batteries were contained in flimsy looking bags which led to them easily being punctured, the anode and cathode touching each other, and the whole thing going poof. But later batteries aren't immune either.
In the video above (you need to open the link to see the video referred), you see a standard lithium ion battery (18650) like those found in a vape or bundled together in the battery pack of a Tesla Model S. As soon as the nail punctures the battery, the anode and cathode touch and thermal runaway occurs.
The potential for explosion due to a puncture can be mitigated with better battery construction — which is why you generally don't have to worry about your Tesla Model S turning into charcoal after a car crash.
From what Samsung is currently reporting, the Note7's flaming failure was something akin to the above nail example. A failure in the production of a number of Note7 batteries meant undue pressure was being exerted on some of the battery packs, and in turn, increasing the likelihood that the anode and cathodes would come into contact.
It's a plausible conclusion, according to Shao-Horn. But she doesn't rule out another potential thermal runaway cause: Overcharging. That's when the positive electrode on the battery becomes so juiced up that it begins to create oxygen inside, which wrecks the delicately balanced chemical composition of the hermetically sealed battery and leads to thermal runaway.
"These processes can happen even in a perfect battery," Shao-Horn said, referring to overcharging and anode on cathode contact. Manufacturing defects like the ones reported in the Note7 failures and those linked to the explosions of cheap vapes, "only make these two processes much worse."
And they're not the only processes. Even a bad USB cable can harm your device. The charging process in a phone or laptop or vape is delicate, and the batteries we use are potentially dangerous — a ticking timebomb if managed incorrectly.
That's why airline authorities always tell you to carry all your lithium batteries in the cabin when you fly. That way if they catch fire the crew can respond quickly. It's why Apple quietly replaced swollen laptop batteries nearly 10 years ago, and why Samsung, despite the massive loss to its bottom line, is currently replacing defective Note7s.
It's also why the UL exists. People like Ken Boyce work very hard to build out the safety science they then disseminate to vendors. If you follow UL's guidelines to a T you're less likely to see your hoverboard destroyed or your vape setting a pocket aflame. Because there exists, within every lithium battery, the potential for thermal runaway. So protect your batteries, keep them out of the heat and make sure you don't overcharge them or use the wrong cable or powerbrick.
And if the company starts a recall on your product return it ASAP. Otherwise it could be your hotel room going up in flames.
Another one bites the dust - Galaxy S7 Edge now..
[I can't get enough of all this! What about you? It seems that no matter what product you have you cannot escape the possibility of having it explode on you. Now its the Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge as well as the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 that is prone to exploding. Of course once it explodes you are without your ability to use Samsung Pay and all those sexy Apps that make your payments for you. Why, oh why, would you chose to use your phone for these functions? Just use your credit cards.
You've already taken enough risk by selecting these products as simple communication systems, without loading all that personal data on it, and without limiting your ability to pay for anything by using it as a substitute for credit cards. Surely you can see that this sexy technology leaves too much to chance and provides too much risk of losing that data and the ability to use it as desired. People do not even look at the screen these days when they tap'n'go - they just tap'n'go when the POS machine is offered to them, or they hand over their credit card to the person at the counter so he/she can swipe or insert it. They don't care about the risk to their hard-earned money, and think they can transfer the risk to the bank. That will not last long will it?? You all know how long banks can remain reasonable about these things. I never hand over my card to anyone these days as there is too much risk of having someone skimming data, let alone all those other phishing problems that can attack phones and steal data. We should have more personal responsibility for securing our data and our funds.]
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge goes bang!
Samsung has an exploding phone problem, and it isn't just the Galaxy Note7.
So claims a California man in a lawsuit filed in federal court in New Jersey last week. Daniel Ramirez says a Galaxy S7 Edge badly burned his right leg when it burst into flames in late May.
Ramirez, who was working a construction job in Akron, Ohio, says he "heard a whistling and screeching sound and noticed his (right-front) pocket vibrating and moving around, as well as thick smoke ascending from his pocket," according to the 19-page suit. Ramirez said he suffered second- and third-degree burns to his right upper leg and right thumb and index finger when the handset ignited his pants and "melted" them to his leg.
Ramirez is seeking more than $US15,000 ($20,000) in compensatory and punitive damages.
It's unclear what caused the handset to ignite but it could be related to the phone's battery, the root of problems with the Galaxy Note7, says Michael Morgan, a Florida lawyer representing Ramirez. Morgan said he was aware of a similar case involving another Samsung phone.
In an email statement, a Samsung spokesperson said, "Recent reports suggesting Samsung's battery issue goes beyond the Galaxy Note7 are not true. The battery cell issue announced earlier this month is isolated to one battery manufacturer for one specific phone model."
While Samsung acknowledged "extremely rare cases" of overheating in other devices, they were caused by "external circumstances" and not related to product quality, the company said.
Two British tabloids this week reported an S7 exploded in a teacher's hands in a cafe in England.
The Sun, which reported the incident, quoted a Samsung spokesman as saying, "There are no known safety issues with Galaxy S7 devices. This issue is currently being investigated and our customer services team is in contact with the customer regarding the matter."
The South Korean electronics giant is entangled in a major recall of the Note7, a critical and commercial success that has been dogged by a combustible battery when charged. That device, released in August, quickly sold more than 2.5 million units.
While some in the mobile technology industry praised Samsung for its quick action in announcing a recall once it had identified a problem with the Note7's battery, the process has been less than smooth. In the US, for example, Samsung apparently did not co-ordinate the recall with the Consumer Product Safety Commission, which made for confusing consumer messaging.
Samsung has sold tens of millions of the Galaxy S7 and the slightly bigger S7 Edge phones since they debuted in March, fuelling a surge that helped make the company the world's biggest seller of smartphones.
People not returning their Galaxy Note 7s
[how can this be? what is in the minds of these people? is it so much more relevant to them that they have the sexy product than their own safety? do they really need to put "being sexy and having the latest product" over and above the safety of themselves and their families? maybe because it will take until the 21st to maybe get a new phone, and how on earth will they be able to pay for anything using Samsung Pay app if they don't have the sexy technology until then? perhaps they can use cash, or a credit card like me? surely this interruption to the sexy technology leaves us all wondering about the deficit in this technology, and also about the mindset of those that chose it. they do not even look at the POS screen when they tap'n'go anymore. they don't know what they are paying for and want to pass the risk off to the bank instead of assuming the risk for themselves. crazy!
I shall stay with my credit card if you don't mind. It has never not worked and it has never exploded, and it has never damaged property or people nearby or who handle it.
This whole thing has gone far too far, and for the sake of what?....expediency? sexiness? speed of transaction and convenience? well it ain't convenient or expedient anymore, 'cos there are real fears about security of the information and your funds and your health now. and it doesn't work in many places and it only has small limit per transaction. nuts!]
Not returning Galaxy Note 7 phones - Crazy
Samsung Urges Consumers To Return Galaxy Note 7 Units; Device Still Used Frequently Despite Recall
Angela Laguipo First Posted: Sep 15, 2016 03:21 PM EDT
Many consumers are still using their Samsung Galaxy Note 7 units despite recall. The South Korean company, Samsung, issued a recall on Sept. 2 over risks of the phone catching fire.
Many consumers are still using their Samsung Galaxy Note 7 units despite recall. The South Korean company, Samsung, issued a recall on Sept. 2 over risks of the phone catching fire.
Despite the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 recall, a lot of people are still using their units frequently. Samsung Electronics, however, urged consumers to return their units over reports of the newly-released phones catching fire.
The company's global replacement program for the Galaxy Note 7 is deemed as a precautionary measure because of its battery cell issue. In fact, several reports show that some units exploded or caught fire while charging.
"Our number one priority is the safety of our customers. We are asking users to power down their Galaxy Note7s and exchange them as soon as possible," DJ Koh, Samsung's president of mobile communications business, said in a statement.
However, nearly two weeks after the recall, the device is still being used by its owners just as frequently. According to Apteligent, a mobile analytics company, the rate of usage of the smartphone has remained the same since Sept. 2, when Samsung officially issued the recall of the device.
The apparent restraint of the consumers to return their units may be due to Samsung's mishandling of its recall process. This is maybe due to the company's lack of efforts to coordinate with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and issuing conflicting information on how to handle the faulty device.
Initially, the tech firm said that there will be a voluntary replacement of the device in the coming weeks. However, it did not mention whether it's safe to continue using the device. After a week, the company said users should turn off their devices completely.
The CPSC, on the other hand, has not yet released an official recall order for the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 since the nature of the recall has yet to be determined and confirmed.
Though an estimated 2.5 million units' recall of the smartphone is a daunting task, the company has not laid a tangible plan for its consumers. The recall may cost the South Korean company a staggering $5 billion in revenue.
Technology too risky - difficult to secure
[Risky adoption of IoT, and we should "improve human and device authentication". I will keep my credit card if you don't mind, and then make every effort to make it better and safer. My credit card does not track me the same way my phone does (although it does track certain things about my life - not all), it does not explode, and it does not get thrown off aircraft, it does not destroy my SUV and nearly burn my child. As Klein says in this article...“Security always plays second fiddle to market ability, to commercialization, to speed to market, to adoption, to convenience. Convenience is the arch enemy of security." Technology needs to improve significantly before we move away from our credit cards. Those who move to this technology leave themselves too exposed to risk, or simply wish to transfer that risk rather than accept it for themselves. I watch people at POS now, and they do not even look at the screen anymore when they tap'n'go. Ridiculous.]
Insecurity of Things?
How can we address the Insecurity of Things?
With more reports of successful cyberattacks on the Internet of Things (IoT), from connected cars, hospitals to nuclear facilities, the security vulnerabilities of IoT have been thrown into the spotlight. At the Cybertech Singapore 2016 conference, a panel discussion was held on the cybersecurity landscape of IoT today.
Larger attack surface
Zori Kor, Vice President, ASERO Worldwide, pointed out that IoT presents a much larger attack surface for hackers, making it difficult to secure. “If everything is open and everything is connected, it means that the attack surface is much bigger. Instead of two or three doors where the bad guys might sneak into, in an Internet of Things environment, everything is connected and the attack surface is much bigger, so hackers have more options to operate in.”
Risky adoption of IoT
Panellists expressed concern at the speed and scale of market-driven IoT adoption, without having sufficient security measures, practices and standards in place.
“The time it took for the land line telephone to spread across the USA spanned decades, whereas the smartphone took just a few years. It is mindboggling, the speed at which people are adopting new technologies, and often they are not putting enough thought behind the security aspect of these technologies,” said Prof. Anupam Chattopadhyay, Assistant Professor at School of Computer Science, Nanyang Technological University.
“The IoT revolution is driven by innovation, and that innovation enjoys a very fast adoption rate by consumers and businesses. Maybe that speed and scale is too hard for us to prepare to, and maybe it is also unpredictable. The social impact introduced by interconnectivity is unpredictable. We will have to address new social questions in the area of privacy, with device tracking, with machine automation, these are questions we have to answer pretty soon,” said Eynav Haim Sayag, Head of Technologies R&D at the Israel National Cyber Bureau.
“Security always plays second fiddle to market ability, to commercialization, to speed to market, to adoption, to convenience. Convenience is the arch enemy of security. The challenge is, how do we embrace all of this technology, and allow it to create and distribute this data in a way that is secure, in a way that is controlled?” said Nick Klein, Director of Klein & Co. Computer Forensics.
Lack of IoT patching
Sayag described the current lack of patching cycles as “a major flaw” in IoT security, while Chattopadhyay pointed out that manufacturers are reluctant to implement hardware patching support.
“There are a lot of security issues which cannot be patched [through software]. You have to recall the devices, you have to modify the whole hardware. For that, it becomes expensive for the manufacturer, the consumer and the developers to recall these. That makes them reluctant to invest and popularize this kind of thing,” said Chattopadhyay.
Information security risks
Klein said that over the last 10-15 years, we have gradually extended the boundaries of our personal information both as individuals and organizations, and this information can be used in malicious ways.
“We have our smartphones, we are connected to the Internet, and we are constantly transmitting information about ourselves. Imagine when we take the next step, when we have constant interactive connectivity with the Internet. All of this is going to create huge amounts of information. That information can be beneficial, but in the wrong hands that information can be used against us in different ways,” said Klein.
Cyberweapons
On a state level, Klein suggests that we have entered a new era of cyberwarfare where cyberweapons have the ability to cause physical kinetic damage to a system, such as in the case of Stuxnet. He also pointed out that cyberweapons can be reverse engineered to cause more harm.
“As we have seen in Stuxnet and other situations, cyberweapons are unique. If you deliver a cyberweapon on someone, it can be captured, reverse engineered and used back against us. It creates a whole new era on the use of this kind of technology for malicious purposes, not only by governments but by organised crime groups, by anyone who cares to pick it up and understand how it works.”
Multiple layers of security
Sayag said that there is probably no one tailored solution for IoT security. The industry will need to adapt existing cybersecurity techniques and practices to new IoT device constraints and networking models, and adopt a holistic approach comprising of multiple layers of security.
“The solution is most probably not comprised of a single layer of security to add on top of the new devices. What we need is a holistic approach that addresses security on all the different layers of the new technologies - the hardware itself, the software, the networking layer, the devices etc. That is the challenge we are currently facing,” said Sayag.
What needs to be done?
What needs to be done to address the new security challenges presented by IoT? Panellists called for regulatory boards to enforce IoT security standards and put a curb on risky adoption of new technology.
“With IoT, it's only a question of time that with regards to privacy and physical security issues, governments will have to enforce regulations and standards,” said Sayag.
“It's a two way process. One is from the regulatory authorities, to come up with really strong steps, to encourage development of security of IoT nodes and devices; and on the side of users, they should be more aware of the kind of things that can be hacked,” said Chattopadhyay.
“I think we are too passive about these new challenges, we think that they will sorted out by themselves, maybe by market forces. We should work faster, and we should encourage more innovative technologies and products with built-in security in mind. That is something the security community, researchers and the industry, should consider right now. I think this is a problem we should solve altogether,” emphasized Sayag.
Sayag also gave a number of recommendations on addressing the challenges of IoT security:
1) Rely on evolved cloud security techniques and keep logic devices thin. Cloud security has evolved and matured in the recent decade, and should be used for data accumulation and smart decision making aspects of IoT. This way, IoT sensors can remain thin, reducing security risks resulting from these devices.
2) Develop dynamic capabilities that support changes in network and environment, such as behavioural detection algorithms and asset mapping for IoT.
3) Establish standard protocols and libraries. This will pave the way for IoT patching cycles, and allow greater community contribution for security and continuous vulnerability management.
4) Improve human and device authentication
5) Develop capabilities to auto-manage networks, to automatically detect IoT devices, configuration errors and security vulnerabilities.
Unprecedented Loss for Samsung - $18.9 Billion USD
[Goodness me. Poor old Samsung, eh!!?? Maybe this technology is not the best way to go. Maybe too many people are looking for an easy, far too sexy, option for everything. Maybe we should all just stay with our credit cards and concentrate on making them better and safer. Then the likes of Samsung Pay will not be in the news. I know that is what Smartmetric says it is trying to do. As an aside, I am very glad I sold my SMSN shares recently.]
Unprecendented
Samsung Electronics shares slide as Note 7 recall takes toll
Samsung Electronics Co Ltd's shares fell to their lowest level in nearly two months on Monday after the tech giant told customers to switch off and return their new Galaxy Note 7 smartphones due to fire-prone batteries.
Investors had wiped 15.9 trillion won ($18.9 billion) off the South Korean firm's market capitalisation as of 0303 GMT, as a series of warnings from regulators and airlines around the world raised fears for the future of the flagship device.
"Some said initially the Galaxy Note 7 could be the best smartphone ever, but now it's possible the phone will go down as the worst ever," IBK Securities analyst Lee Seung-woo said, predicting weak sales in the fourth quarter.
Samsung Electronics' common shares were down 6.3 per cent to 1,476,000 won each after touching their lowest level since July 12, and were on track for their biggest daily percentage drop in more than four years.
Analysts said the recall could torpedo Galaxy Note 7 sales and have a lasting impact on the $US211 billion company's brand image, which could derail a recovery in its smartphone market share against rivals like Apple Inc.
The global smartphone leader on Saturday urged all customers to turn off their Note 7s and return them as soon as possible as part of the recall which it voluntarily initiated on September 2.
Unprecedented
The recall is unprecedented for Samsung, which prides itself on its manufacturing prowess. Some analysts estimate the firm might lose 5 billion won worth of revenue after accounting for recall costs. The company had said it had sold 2.5 million Galaxy Note 7s that need to be replaced.
Nomura said it had cut its forecast for Samsung's third-quarter mobile operating profit by 900 billion won to 3.1 trillion won in the wake of the Note 7 recall.
"Even if Samsung puts Note 7s with new batteries in the market it won't sell as well as it had initially," HMC Investment analyst Greg Roh said.
"Long-term, it will cost Samsung significant marketing spending to ensure the next products can overcome this issue."
The Note 7 problems are a major blow to Samsung's efforts to build on the strong sales of its Galaxy S7 smartphones launched in March.
The firm was beginning to claw back smartphone market share and had tried to pre-empt Apple by launching the almost $US900 Note 7 on August 19, about a month ahead of the latest iPhone release.
The recall forced Samsung to halt sales indefinitely in markets such as the United States and push back launches in other regions such as Europe.
Gutted - No Samsung Pay
[That's the least of the concerns for this poor man and his family. It could have been tragic.]
car is gutted by fire started by phone
[This is so sad. I'm glad it wasn't my car, or my phone, or my 8 year old daughter. It seems moot to even consider the loss of the ability to use that wonderful Samsung Pay to complete my transactions.
Maybe Samsung will now try to get into the credit card business. Maybe we should all just not worry about these sexy apps and concentrate on making credit cards better.]
Samsung tell all Note 7 owners to return devices after car is gutted by fire started by phone
SAMSUNG has told owners of its Galaxy Note 7 to hand their phone back immediately after a car was gutted by a fire caused by the device exploding.
A Jeep went up in flames after its owner left his Note 7 charging on the dashboard.
The company is warning customers to completely stop using the mobiles as stories emerged last week of the gadgets going up in flames.
Several airlines have also banned the phone being taken on flights because of fears it poses a safety risk.
The latest report of a Note 7 blowing up saw it set fire to a car as a young girl was about to climb into the back seat.
Florida man Nathan Dornacher had his mobile plugged into his Grand Cherokee’s dashboard while he was unloading the boot.
While inside his house he sent his eight-year-old daughter to get back into the car — but when he looked out the window he saw the car was in flames.
Describing the terrifying incident, he told Fox 13: “It was very surprising to me how quick the [dashboard] caught on fire.
“Once it got the [dashboard], the airbags went and started exploding”.
His modified car was completely destroyed.
“That’s the last thought in my head; that a brand new device, something as simple as a phone, is going to burn down my car, my house, or hurt a family member”, he said.
Last week Samsung ordered a recall of 2.5 million Note 7 devices after reports emerged of them catching fire during charging.
The new phone was only launched by the South Korean phone giant in August.
In a statement, the world’s biggest mobile maker said: “Our customers’ safety is an absolute priority.
“Until a replacement device is provided, Samsung asks all customers with a Galaxy Note 7 smartphone to power down your device and return it to its place of purchase at your earliest opportunity”.
Airlines Qantas, Virgin Australia, Singapore Airlines, Emirates and Etihad have banned the phones from their flights.
US flight regulator the FAA has also warned against packing the device in hold luggage.
Samsung has promised to replace all phones handed in from 19 September.
The story first appeared on The Sun.
Total Recall
[No its not about Arnie. Its about a piece of technology that has let down millions of people around the world. Samsung has urged all people who have bought the Galaxy Note7 to Not use it, to return it for safety reasons. More airlines - Scandinavian and Singapore - also disallow these products on their aircraft. My goodness! What a shame for all those people who have intended to use this product for their payments instead of using credit cards. Samsung Pay is not an option for these people now.
Why not stay as we are and keep using our credit cards? Just try to make credit cards better. They do not explode and you can take them anywhere.]
Samsung urges a Total Recall
Samsung urges customers to halt use of Galaxy Note 7
Smartphone maker calls on consumers to stop using faulty Galaxy Note 7s and exchange them as reports of fires continue.
Samsung Electronics has renewed calls to consumers to stop using its Galaxy Note 7 smartphones immediately and exchange them as soon as possible, as more reports of phones catching fire emerged even after the company's global recall.
The fresh call from the South Korean company, the world's largest smartphone maker, came on Saturday after US authorities urged consumers to switch the Note 7 off and not to use or charge it during a flight.
Several airlines around the world asked travelers not switch on the smartphone or put it in checked baggage, with some carriers banning the phone on flights.
In a statement posted on its website, Samsung asked users around the world to "immediately" return their existing Galaxy Note 7 and get a replacement.
"We are asking users to power down their Galaxy Note 7s and exchange them as soon as possible," Koh Dong-jin, Samsung's mobile president, said in the statement.
"We are expediting replacement devices so that they can be provided through the exchange program as conveniently as possible."
Consumers can visit Samsung's service centers to receive rental phones for temporary use. Samsung plans to provide Galaxy Note 7 devices with new batteries in South Korea starting on September 19, but schedules for other countries vary.
Earlier this month, Samsung announced an unprecedented recall of 2.5 million Galaxy Note 7s worldwide just two weeks after the phone was launched. That move came after Samsung's investigation into reports of fires found that rechargeable lithium batteries manufactured by one of its suppliers were at fault.
The US was among the first countries to take action following the recall. Late on Friday, the US Consumer Product Safety Commission urged owners of the phone to turn them off and leave them off. It also said it was working with Samsung and hoped to have an official recall "as soon as possible".
The recall by the safety commission will allow the US Federal Aviation Administration to ban passengers from carrying the phones on planes. The FAA already warned airline passengers late on Thursday not to turn on or charge the Galaxy Note 7 during flights and not to put the smartphone in their checked baggage.
Scandinavian Airlines said on Saturday that it has prohibited passengers from using the Galaxy Note 7 on its flights because of concerns about fires. Singapore Airlines has also banned the use or charging of the device during flights.
Samsung said it had confirmed 35 cases of the Galaxy Note 7 catching fire as of September 1, most of them occurring while the battery was being charged.
There are at least two more cases that Samsung said it is aware of - one at a hotel in Perth, Australia, and another in St Petersburg, Florida, where a family reported that a Galaxy Note 7 left charging in their Jeep had caught fire, destroying the vehicle.
Samsung released the Galaxy Note 7 on August 19. The Galaxy Note series is one of the most expensive lineups made by Samsung.
More airlines disallow Galaxy Note7
[Wow. More airlines, the world over, are stopping this technology from appearing or being charged on their flights. I wonder how a person can make payments through Samsung Pay with a piece of technology feared to be explosive and when it cannot be charged at certain places. I would not want to carry and use this type of technology when there are other available means to make my payments - yep - by using the good old credit card.]
Airlines in Australia
Airlines in India
Galaxy Note7 - NO says Virgin, Jetstar, Tiger too
[The airlines must be scared for our safety. How can we all use that sexy technology now? How can we access our e-wallet to pay for services? I guess we may have to stay with the safer and more reliable technology - the good old credit card. I will.]
Gosh - they are all doing it now
Qantas, Jetstar, Virgin Australia and Tiger Airways have banned passengers from using or charging Samsung Galaxy Note 7 smartphones on planes over concerns their batteries could explode or catch fire.
The airlines have introduced the ban following Samsung's recall of its Galaxy Note 7 smartphones, which was launched in August.
Qantas on Thursday banned passengers charging Galaxy Note7s on all flights.
A spokesperson on Friday said the airline was also asking owners of the phone not to switch it on in-flight.
A Virgin spokesperson said: "Following Samsung's product recall announcement, Samsung Galaxy Note 7 devices may not be used or charged on board Virgin Australia flights."
Jetstar is a wholly owned subsidiary of Qantas while Tiger is a subsidiary of Virgin Australia.
Samsung Australia on Monday recalled 51,060 Galaxy Note 7 smartphones, after its parent company found some of the batteries have exploded or caught fire. It subsequently stopped all sales of the Galaxy Note 7 and is offering customers replacements.
The South Korean tech giant has said there were 35 instances of Note 7s catching fire or exploding as of September 1. Two of these were in Australia, including one in Perth where a man's phone was scorched as he slept in his hotel room.
Samsung has sold about 2.5 million Note 7s around the world, with an estimated one in 42,000 units at risk of having a faulty battery.
The move by the Australian airlines comes as the US Federal Aviation Administration "strongly" advised plane passengers not to use Galaxy Note 7s and recommended against charging the devices on-board or stowing them in checked baggage. In a statement on its website overnight, the FAA said its advice came "in light of recent incidents and concerns raised by Samsung" about the phones.
The advisory was in keeping with the FAA's past statements. It has documented hundreds of cases involving batteries from e-cigarettes, laptops, digital cameras, cellphones, electric bicycles, flashlights, GPS trackers, drones and even a cordless drill catching fire or overheating on passenger planes.
The recall comes at a devastating time for Samsung, as rival Apple launches its new iPhone.
Galaxy Note7 - Not on Indian flights
India says NO - Galaxy Note7
[Here we go again. Not in India either. I cannot carry my Galaxy Note7 on Indian flights and have it switched on. How can I do my banking and make other arrangements from my e-wallet when on board? If you don't mind I'll keep my credit card and not switch to the so-called sexy technology, 'cos I can't use it now.]
Qantas says NO - to charging your Galaxy Note7
...so how can you get to your wallet if it ain't charged?
Qantas bans passengers from charging new Samsung Galaxy Note7 phones on flights
[I can only imagine the inconvenience suffered by those who elect to use the sexy new technology and carry their wallet in their phones, only to be told you can't charge them on planes 'cos they could explode. How embarrassing!! Goodness - can you imagine the indignity of wanting to flash your boarding pass on your sexy phone but it ain't charged, and you can't charge it in the lounge? And can you imagine wanting to pay for a car or taxi at the destination, but you can't 'cos your sexy e-wallet ain't charged, 'cos your airline won't let you charge it ...?! I'd much prefer to carry my credit card thanks - if you don't mind. I have never owned a credit card that exploded. Maybe there is an argument for staying with what we've got now and not chasing the sexy time-saving rainbow.]
Not on our flights - Qantas
Qantas is banning passengers charging the new Samsung Galaxy Note7 on all flights because of fears devices with faulty batteries could catch fire.
Samsung has issued a global recall of the device after incidents of the devices catching fire when plugged in to charge.
In recent days, there have been two incidents of the device exploding, including one case in Perth where a man's phone was scorched as he slept in his hotel room.
Qantas passenger Dean Cabena told Fairfax Media flight crew warned passengers on a Perth to Sydney flight this week against recharging the device in the air.
A Qantas Group spokesman said the ban had been issued following Samsung's global recall.
"Following the worldwide recall of the Samsung Galaxy Note7 Personal Electronic Device (PED), we are requesting that passengers do not charge them inflight," the spokesman said.
Samsung issued the recall on 2 September when it said as of 1 September, there had been 35 incidents involving the device and faulty batteries.
It subsequently stopped all sales of the Galaxy Note7 and is offering customers replacements.
Samsung Australia said it's recall was "voluntary and proactive." It said there had been two instances of the phone overheating in Australia.
An estimated 50,000 phones will be recalled in Australia.
It comes at a devastating time for Samsung, as rival Apple launches its new iPhone.
Glad I can take my credit card on planes!
The US FAA Is Considering A Ban On Samsung's Exploding Smartphones
Phones banned on Aircraft ?? - US FAA
[ I have never heard of a credit card exploding, so I am going to stay with a credit card rather than try the new sexy Apps on phones and carrying my e-wallet thingy..]
Last week, Samsung recalled roughly 2.5 million smartphones after it was discovered that at least 35 of the devices had spontaneously burst into flames. Make that 35 and counting. But don’t worry, if you’d like to bring your Galaxy Note 7 onto a flight in the US, the FAA still hasn’t decided whether it should ban the devices on planes. The agency is thinking about it, however.
Gizmodo reached out to the FAA, TSA and major US airlines this weekend about whether they will restrict the devices from being carried onto flights. Tonight, the FAA finally told us that it’s still working on exploring the issue but that no final decision has been made. Any official recall for a battery-powered device like this could mean that the devices wouldn’t be allowed on future flights.
“The FAA and the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration are working on guidance related to this issue,” an FAA spokesperson told Gizmodo over email. “If the device is recalled by the manufacturer, airline crew and passengers will not be able to bring recalled batteries or electronics that contain recalled batteries in the cabin of an aircraft, or in carry-on and checked baggage.”
If this sounds confusing, that’s because it is. Samsung has already “recalled” the Galaxy Note 7, but the South Korean company hasn’t actually recalled it the right way in the US. The proper way to institute a recall is to get the US Consumer Product Safety Commission involved from the beginning. Samsung didn’t do that. And now, US federal agencies like the FAA are left scrambling and days behind, trying to figure out what to do.
Samsung has sold about one million Galaxy Note 7 devices worldwide since the new model’s introduction in August, and it’s voluntarily recalling about 2.5 million Galaxy Note 7 devices that have been produced. Samsung is offering consumers refunds and a replacement product that the company says should be available in a few weeks. But the devices are still for sale in some retail outlets around the United States since Samsung didn’t initiate an official recall with the US Consumer Product Safety Commission.
When reached for comment in the past few days none of the major US-based airlines had any plans to ban the phones. Alaska Airlines, Southwest Airlines and American Airlines told Gizmodo that they did not have any specific plans to ban the Galaxy Note 7 on their flights. Other major airlines didn’t return our messages, presumably because “new phone who dis?” But a ban from the FAA — should that come to pass — would be observed by all the airlines.
In late 2015, the FAA banned so-called hoverboards, the self-balancing scooters that became infamous for containing batteries that would overheat and literally burst into flames. The hoverboards were restricted from flights, prompting notable hotheads like Russell Crowe to figuratively burst into flames.
It’s not clear how a hypothetical ban on a specific model of phone would be enacted. Would TSA agents look at each phone very carefully? One imagines it wouldn’t be that much harder than making sure your toothpaste is in a 100g tube rather than a 110g tube.
Your potentially explosive Galaxy Note 7 is still welcome on all US flights, both domestic and international, as far as the FAA and major US airlines are concerned. At least for now, it is. But please remember that your 110g container of toothpaste is a danger to everyone on board. There have been precisely zero cases of toothpaste containers spontaneously bursting into flames in the past month, to our knowledge, but you can never be too careful.
Exploding Samsung Galaxy (update)
[Wow! I think I would rather have a credit card in my wallet than run the risk of having an e-wallet that could explode while I was sleeping. I'll keep my credit card if you don't mind. For those who like interesting photos, go to the link and check out the really really special phone.]
Galaxy Note7 'explodes' in Perth hotel causing $1800 damage
Electronics company Samsung has confirmed two incidents of their newly-released smartphone exploding in Australia in recent days, including a case in Perth on Monday where a man's phone exploded as he slept in his hotel room.
The Galaxy Note7 smartphone has been recalled around the world after safety concerns emerged about the battery causing fires while the phone was plugged in to charge.
More than 50,000 of the phones will be recalled in Australia.
Victorian man Tham Hua, who was visiting Perth on a business trip, said he plugged in the smartphone to charge before he slept, resting it on his hotel mattress.
He woke up to a loud pop and a hissing sound and watched as the phone caught on fire.
The explosion caused more than $1800 damage to the room – a cost Mr Hua said in posts on Reddit and product forum Whirlpool that Samsung Australia had agreed to cover.
"My brand new Note7 exploded this morning while I was still asleep, it was plugged in and charging," Mr Hua posted.
"Phone completely fried... [Samsung] told me this is the first case in Australia.
"[It] charred the hotel room bed sheet and the carpet when I whacked it down to the floor, burnt one of my fingers while doing that too."
Samsung confirmed to Fairfax Media that Mr Hua's case was one of two experienced in Australia. It would appear both incidents occurred since Friday, when Samsung's worldwide recall announcement said Australia had seen no cases of the battery defect.
The smartphone was launched in Australia on August 19, retailing for $1,349. More than 35 cases of the exploding battery defect had been experienced around the world by September 1.
Samsung are now advising anyone who owns the Note 7 to turn off their phone and leave it off until they can exchange it.
"Samsung Electronics Australia advises all customers who use a Galaxy Note7 smartphone to power down their device, return it to its place of purchase and use an alternative device until a remedy can be provided," Samsung said in a statement on Monday.
"Customers who have purchased a Galaxy Note7 from Samsung are entitled to choose a new Galaxy Note7 (and a courtesy device until replacement Galaxy Note7 stock arrives) or a full refund."
Mr Hua said he took his charred phone into Samsung "wrapped in newspaper and inside a zip-lock bag" but staff had "no idea" what had happened.
"It's the first time they saw such a thing," he said.
"They gave me a loan device J1, and [I] have been promised that they will take care of the hotel damages bill."
Samsung Pay a Risk in the new Galaxy Note 7
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/technology/samsung-australia-formally-recalls--50000-galaxy-note7-smartphones/news-story/f794c59cd0c22e93637ab0da720faee5
[you would not want to have your wallet in this technology either - the new Galaxy Note 7 recalled. I'll keep my credit card if you don't mind. Imagine turning up at the counter and wanting to pay your bill using Samsung Pay with this sexy piece of rubbish!]
Samsung Australia has formally recalled the 51,060 Galaxy Note7 smartphones it sold locally before withdrawing it from sale after handsets exploded overseas.
Incidents involving 35 phones worldwide, including batteries exploding while charging in Samsung’s home country of South Korea prompted alarm about the safety of the handset, which went on sale in 10 countries.
While none of last week’s reported incidents were in Australia, Samsung Electronics Australia said it was taking “the proactive and voluntary step” of recalling the 51,060 Galaxy Note7 smartphones in response to global concerns.
Globally Samsung is recalling and replacing up to 2.5 million Note7 phones, with a potential billion dollar cost to the company.
“Samsung Electronics Australia advises all customers who use a Galaxy Note7 smartphone to power off their device, return it to its place of purchase and use an alternative device until a remedy can be provided,” the company said in a statement.
It is advising them to turn off their Note7 device immediately.
“Customers who have purchased a Galaxy Note7 from Samsung are entitled to a new Galaxy Note7 and a courtesy device until replacement Galaxy Note7 stock arrives or a full refund,” the statement said.
“The delivery of a replacement Galaxy Note 7 to customers is expected within three to four weeks.
“Alternatively, customers who have not purchased a Galaxy Note7 from Samsung can approach their place of purchase to discuss their remedy options.”
Samsung says courtesy devices will be available from tomorrow.
Galaxy Note7 smartphone owners can visit the place of purchase, call Samsung customer service on 1300 362 603 or visit http://www.samsung.com/au/galaxynote7-notice/.
Good news for credit card users
Reducing those horrible card fees
Ban on excessive credit card surcharging begins for large merchants
The last time Leah Doyle withdrew cash from an ATM was more than two weeks ago.Like an increasing number of Australians, cash features less and less in Ms Doyle's life and, until today, she has been paying for it.
"I use cards all the time. I usually don't get cash out, only if an [establishment] is cash-only."
Ms Doyle said, despite the convenience of using her card all the time, she is constantly frustrated by credit card surcharges she often faces.
"I think it's ridiculous, just for using a card. And you are not always aware of it, when you purchase something and then you get this surprise additional cost at the end."
For Ms Doyle and other Australian consumers like her, new laws banning excessive credit card surcharging from September 1 will be welcome news.
The legislation was passed by the Turnbull government in February, and will apply for large merchants from Thursday, reducing costs on goods such as air fares and concert and sporting tickets for consumers.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission will be responsible for enforcing the new regulations, which will also apply for small merchants from September 1 next year.
"The new law limits the amount a large business can charge customers for use of payment methods such as most credit and debit cards. Businesses can only pass on the permitted costs of the payment method such as bank fees and terminal costs," said ACCC chairman Rod Sims.
"The ACCC is aware that some event ticketing companies are intending to change their pricing practices from September 1, such that consumers will no longer be charged fees based on the payment method chosen."
Just how much a merchant can charge consumers will be defined by the Reserve Bank of Australia Payments System Board, which published its standard relating to surcharges in May.
As a guide, the RBA has advised that the costs to merchants of accepting payments by debit cards is about 0.5 per cent, by credit card 1-1.5 per cent, and for American Express cards 2-3 per cent. However, some merchants' costs might be higher.
"Any surcharge that a merchant chooses to levy must be specified as a percentage of the transaction value or, if set as a fixed amount, must not be exceed the cost of acceptance for the relevant transaction value," the standard states.
Qantas has already announced that a $100 domestic airfare, paid by a credit card, under the new laws, will now attract a surcharge of 1.3 per cent, or $1.30, a far cry from the 7 per cent surcharge that existed under its old regime.
"It's been a very long time coming," said Tom Godfrey, spokesman for consumer group Choice.
"The fact that excessive surcharging is going to be banned for large organisations is a massive win. Whether it's airlines, hotels, ticketing companies, consumers are going to see huge savings."
Consumer advocate and spokesman for the Surcharge Free campaign Christopher Zinn said the changes would help, but for most people it would not "make much of a difference".
"Qantas really let the cat out of the bag, when they said in a statement that the majority of Qantas customers will pay the same or less in fees than they do under the current system. I see it as a start, but certainly not the end of the issue."
Mr Zinn said businesses continued to argue there were costs to accepting credit cards, despite such costs having dropped significantly since 2003.
He pointed to the RBA's 2016 Review of Card Payments Regulations, which found average merchant service fees for MasterCard and Visa transactions have fallen by 68 basis points relative to their levels prior to 2003.
"The new regulation says a surcharge shouldn't be above the cost of acceptance, so that shouldn't put it much above 1 per cent. So for businesses, in many cases, it may be cheaper to accept card than cash."
A 2014 discussion paper by the RBA argued that the cost of cash transactions for a merchant is about 2.5 per cent, in time and wages.
A Torrent of Apple infection
Mac BitTorrent infected with Malware ...AGAIN
I know it happens all the time to software, but can you really expect your Apple Pay App to stay free from this sort of infection? And would you want to take the risk of having the security of your money threatened? It seems Apple is a constant target and there's little that can be done until your details are lost. Maybe we should all stay with our credit cards instead of moving to clever-dick phone wallets and the like.
"This would be a bad situation for any application. It’s just a bad look for your app to spread malware. But in this case, it’s even worse because this is the second time Transmission has been hijacked in less than six months."
faults are hardly significant - unless its yours that fails. right?
iPhone models paralysed
[I'd rather have my Smartmetric secured credit card than be carrying the phone]
There's some bad news for owners of the iPhone 6 and especially the larger iPhone 6 Plus. Your device could be on borrowed time.
Third party iPhone repair specialists in the United States are reporting an increasing incidence of malfunctioning iPhone 6 and 6 Plus models featuring the same grey flickering bars at the top of the screen and an unresponsive or intermittently responsive touch screen.
The condition is "incredibly common", according to iFixit, a respected US-based repair advocacy group. One repair expert contacted by the organisation went as far to say that "chances are pretty high" that every iPhone 6 Plus could eventually succumb.
The problem is so prevalent that iFixit have even given this condition a name: "touch disease".
The malfunction is also being widely reported on Apple's own support forums.
"[Touch disease] has been creeping up on us," iFixit co-founder Kyle Wiens told Fairfax Media. "I first saw it a year ago but as these phones get older it's getting more and more common."
Patrick Lee, a director of repair chain iExperts Sydney, describes the issue as "widespread". "I would estimate that we have seen about 100 cases to date," he told Fairfax Media.
...continues on link ...
______________________________________________
Do you really want to turn up at a counter to pay a bill and be using unreliable technology?
More and more news media speaks to the issues surrounding Apple Pay and so-called smart phones that "allegedly" everyone wants to use (which I doubt!) - and its so flawed. Buy hey - if you want to be embarrassed 'cos you stand at a counter and have no means to pay your bill - I will say "I told you so".
I am not against Apple
I have no real negative agenda with Apple. I have Apple products.
But I will not utilise technology such as the apps that so many people want now - cos they are too lazy and running out of time - running out of the time it takes to securely deal with their own money.
Too many people are in such a hurry that they think its cool to tap'n'go and leave the bank or other financial institution to carry the risk. They want it too, cos it speeds up the way you all spend, slightly.
The risk with this technology is too great for my liking.
We have not been consulted along the way.
We have simply had it thrust upon us, and people these days are too quick to jump on the sexy technology, so they don't give a 'rip'. They don't even look at the screen when they tap'n'leave.
Someone else will carry the risk eh?!
I am simply demonstrating through recent news articles that there are significant problems with the technology and some of the companies that put that technology out. How can you and I depend on our information and money being securely managed when these companies are being hacked so easily?
But who cares eh?
If you believe what smme is doing (!!??), then some of the security issues will be moderated in a way that resonates with my way of thinking. I will never use that technology. If my credit card is taken from me I will find another way to manage my money to acquire things.
Every iPhone in the world hacked - Apple fails again !!
...and you people who simply want a sexy product that saves a few seconds at transaction time want us to trust yours and my hard-earner money to this technology?? Why would you??!!
Apple forced to issue a global update of iOS after the discovery of sophisticated malware
APPLE has been forced to issue a global update of its mobile operating system after an established private cyberarms dealer found a way to hack every iPhone in the world.
The hackers from NSO Group developed a sophisticated piece of malware that exploited three previously unknown vulnerabilities in Apple’s iOS.
After learning of the hack, Apple developed a patch with its latest iOS update, which it is advising people to download immediately.
“We were made aware of this vulnerability and immediately fixed it with iOS 9.3.5. We advise all of our customers to always download the latest version of iOS to protect themselves against potential security exploits,” a spokesman told AP.
New joint reports from Citizen Lab and mobile security company Lookout said this was a world first for an attack of this kind in the wild.
Lookout vice president of research Mike Murray said the hack was essentially a remote jailbreak — the process of removing software restrictions imposed by iOS.
“We realised that we were looking at something that no one had ever seen in the wild before,” he told Motherboard.
“Literally a click on a link to jailbreak an iPhone in one step. [It is] one of the most sophisticated pieces of cyberespionage software we’ve ever seen.”
Mr Murray said the malware, codenamed Pegasus, gave attackers full control of the smartphone. “It basically steals all the information on your phone, it intercepts every call, it intercepts every text message, it steals all the emails, the contacts, the FaceTime calls,” he said.
“It also basically backdoors every communications mechanism you have on the phone,”
“It steals all the information in the Gmail app, all the Facebook messages, all the Facebook information, your Facebook contacts, everything from Skype, WhatsApp, Viber, WeChat, Telegram — you name it.”
Since being established in 2010, NSO has become notorious for selling its sophisticated malware to governments.
However, the group largely works in stealth, operating without any web presence other than a LinkedIn profile, which says the company has been 201 and 500 employees.
Citizen Lab researcher Bill Marczak said breaking down the malicious program was compared to “defusing a bomb”.
“It is amazing the level they’ve gone through to avoid detection,” he said. “They have a hair-trigger self-destruct.”
Mr Murray said this is the first time anyone had ever been able to document tools used by NSO. “This is the first time any security researchers, as far as any of us are aware, have ever gotten a copy of NSO Group’s spyware and been able to reverse engineer it,” he told Wired.
“They are a really sophisticated threat actor and the software they have reflects that. They are incredibly committed to stealth.”
The threat was initially found after human rights activist from the United Arab Emirates, Ahmed Mansoor, received a text message offering “new secrets about torture of Emiratis in state prisons” with a link from an unknown number.
Having previously fallen victim to government hackers using commercial spyware products, Mr Mansoor flagged the message with Citizen Lab.
“As a human rights defender in a country that considers such a thing as a threat, an enemy or traitor, I have to be more careful than the average person,” he told Wired. “Such content was enough to trigger all the red flags with me,”
While NSO Group won’t be able to use this particular attack anymore on updated iPhones, it’s likely another won’t be far behind.
Limited Innovation in Mobile Wallets Technology
[The giant hope for trendies who want this so-called amazing technology seems to be faltering day by day. No agreement, no consensus. Another example of big business trying to impose itself on everyone whether we want it or not. Another example of big businesses trying to take over another big business and its own policy - right or wrong - so they can control what they don't own. I wonder if CCH has encountered this along the way....banks and others trying to control our business?!]
Retailers Join Banks in Apple Pay Dispute
Australia's retailers have joined the attack on Apple's global policy that prevents third-party payment applications from using the communications antenna on the iPhone, saying it will limit innovation in mobile payments and digital wallets.
The retail sector has backed three of Australia's big four banks in their dispute with the world's biggest company over getting their digital wallets onto iPhones.
Apple's own Apple Pay application is the only app that is able to use the iPhone's "near field communication" (NFC) chip, the technology that communicates with point-of-sale terminals to facilitate "tap and go" payments.
But retailers say that new mobile wallet services, apps that are being developed by banks and some large retailers, are unlikely to succeed unless they are available on all the major mobile phone platforms. Mobile wallets combine payment cards, loyalty cards, identification and public transport cards into an app on a device.
"In our view, for as long as Apple Pay remains the only app that can use the iPhone's NFC functionality, the potential for innovation in mobile wallets and mobile payments will be limited," said the Australian Retailers Association in a submission to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission.
"With Apple's iOS or Google's Android installed on almost every smartphone sold today, a service only available on one of those platforms will struggle to succeed...
"We would like to see all customers have a choice of mobile wallets and payment services using the mobile phone they already have and the bank debit and credit cards and loyalty cards they already use."
The ARA is the peak industry body for the $300 billion retail sector in Australia, which employees more than 1.2 million people. Its submission follows an application made last month by Commonwealth Bank of Australia, Westpac Banking Corporation, National Australia Bank, and Bendigo and Adelaide Bank who have asked the ACCC whether they can negotiate as a block against Apple over access to the NFC antenna and to develop common security standards.
ACCC chairman Rod Sims said on Friday the regulator had an open mind on the issue and would have to balance anti-competitive conduct on both sides to work out what would be in the best interests of consumers. It will make a draft determination in October.
Apple said in a submission to the ACCC that providing banks with access to the phone's transmitter would compromise the security of Apple's hardware and the banks' application "is only the latest tactic employed by these competing banks to blunt Apple's entry into the Australian market".
In a separate submission, supermarket giant Coles, which will report through its parent Wesfarmers its full-year results on Wednesday, said it does not object to the banks' application to collectively negotiate with Apple on industry standards and guidelines in the design of security and other processes.
"It is important to recognise that the industry has collectively made very significant investment in payments technologies like NFC, with an open and inclusive approach aimed at continually improving the experience for all customers," Coles said.
The Australian Payments Clearing Association has also backed the banks' application, saying in a submission to the ACCC it anticipates increasing consumer demand for and adoption of mobile payment products in the next five years.
"APCA supports payments innovation and consumers being able to exercise choice in relation to payment services and products. In particular, we consider that access to payment platforms and competition on open platforms, are key enablers of innovation in payment services and products, and deliver tangible benefits to consumers and merchants. We consider that exclusivity and restrictions on access to platforms and functionality, by contrast, may tend to stifle innovation and competition."
The ARA submission, published by the ACCC on Tuesday, pointed to card issuers and consumer groups outside Australia raising concerns with Apple over access to the iPhone platform, calls that have fallen on deaf ears.
"We would hope that the ACCC's authorisation of this collective negotiation may add to this growing concern and encourage Apple to reconsider its position," ARA said.
"This is an important time in the development of mobile wallets and mobile payments. There is now an opportunity for rapid innovation and for new players, platforms and services to emerge in a quickly developing market.
"However, in order to realise these benefits, it is important that consumers and merchants have a choice between mobile wallets and mobile payment services whichever mobile device or platform they have chosen.
Apple Pay problems - update @ 22Aug
Our regulator is protecting us from what?
- The banks and their technology and intent, or
- Apple Pay and its intent to profit at any cost?
- Or both?
It seems like their is a lot of risk to consumers in either case.
(trailing comments worth a look too)
________________________________________________________________________
ACC - Banks - Apple Pay
Why the ACCC siding with the banks against Apple will not be in consumers' interests
The Australian Competition & Consumer Commission (ACCC) has denied four of Australia’s banks an interim authorisation to act collectively against Apple and other third party wallet providers (Samsung and Google) in Australia.
In essence, the banks asked the ACCC to allow them to collectively negotiate with Apple over the terms of its electronic payment system Apple Pay. They have argued that Apple is stifling competition by not allowing banks direct access to the NFC wireless functionality in the iPhone so that they can create their own “digital wallets”.
The ACCC has decided not to grant their request, instead it has stated that it needs more time and more consultation before it makes a decision.
Only 6 parties had responded to the request despite over 80 different parties being requested to do so. This was principally because the banks were pushing for a response within 28 days which didn’t give anyone time to respond properly.
Ultimately, for the ACCC to grant the banks their request to act collectively, they will need to decide whether this is going to be in the best interests of consumers.
The fact that it is not immediately obvious that this is clearly not in the interest of consumers reflects a fundamental lack of understanding of the nature of the technology that is being discussed.
Apple Pay provides secure access to your credit card not using the details of the card itself, but as an encrypted representation of the card provided by the issuing banks along with a token that is supplied by the card networks Visa, MasterCard and American Express. The encrypted data and tokens are stored in a piece of hardware called the Secure Element, an industry standard, certified chip. This communicates directly with the NFC wireless that in turn communicates with the payment terminals.
The main points about this is that the banks are always in control over the transactions that happen and over which cards are added to the phone and how they are validated. This means that from a user perspective, there is absolutely nothing that can be gained from a consumer perspective by having the cards added separately in another digital wallet provided by the banks.
For the benefit of the ACCC, it is worth emphasising this point. The functionality of the physical transaction between a card and terminal should absolutely not vary between card providers. What can vary is the functionality that is provided by banks via their own apps for consumers to track payments, pay off card balances, transfer money, etc. Apple Pay does not interfere with this aspect of functionality and so banks can, and do already, provide apps to do this.
In fact, there are a large number of disadvantages that consumers would face by having the banks use their own digital wallets to actually load cards and carry out the payments:
[1] Each bank would use a different process for loading cards and different security mechanisms for access them to pay with. This would contrast with the ability to pay from the lock screen using the fingerprint scanner using Apple Pay.
[2] Customers would have multiple apps to store cards from different providers adding to the burden of updating them in order to make sure they had the latest security updates.
[3] There would be no guarantee that banks would have apps updated for new versions of the iPhone operating system with each release - especially for beta versions of the operating system. This would mean that customers could be left without a payment mechanism until some time after new versions of the operating system are released. This was indeed the case with the Commonwealth Bank’s payment system on Samsung phones.
[4] Apple Pay will be available through integration with Safari in the next version of iOS. Not having cards in Apple Pay would mean that this functionality would also not be available to customers using digital wallets provided by banks.
[5] The banks have basically prohibited the Australian consumer from using their phones for payment in the way that millions of other users are able to. Indeed, the banks are wanting to actually charge customers for that privilege.
As I have argued before, there is no chance that Apple will completely overhaul the architecture of its hardware and operating system to accommodate 4 banks in Australia when 3,000 banks worldwide have decided to adopt it.
This is not an argument about stifled innovation or enhancing security, in fact, it is the opposite, what is being suggested will diminish both of these. What it is is an attempt for banks to maintain their dominant market power and continue to pass on unnecessary charges to customers.
What the ACCC will achieve however by allowing the banks the ability to collectively bargain against Apple is that it will delay other banks and organisations from signing up. Again it is worth stressing that this is not just a fight against Apple, Australian consumers will be prevented from using equivalent systems on Android and Samsung.
____________________________
Article Author:David Glance
Director of UWA Centre for Software Practice, University of Western Australia
Disclosure statement
David Glance owns shares in companies discussed in this article
Apple Flop
Apple Pay struggles
More than 18 months after Apple Pay took the United States by storm, the smartphone giant has made only a small dent in the global payments market, snagged by technical challenges, low consumer take-up and resistance from banks.
Apple Pay usage totalled $US10.9 billion ($A15.02 billion) in 2015, the vast majority of that in the United States. That is less than the annual volume of transactions in Kenya, a mobile payments pioneer, according to research firm Timetric.
And its global turnover is a drop in the bucket in China, where internet giants Alibaba and Tencent dominate the world's biggest mobile payments market - with an estimated $US1 trillion worth of mobile transactions in 2015, according to iResearch data.
Anecdotal evidence from Britain, China and Australia suggests Apple Pay is popular with core Apple followers, but the quality of service, and interest in it, varies significantly.
To use Apple Pay, consumers tap their iPhone over payment terminals to buy coffee, train tickets and other services. It can be also used at vending machines that accept contactless payments.
Apple Pay transactions were a fraction of the $US84.5 billion in iPhone sales for the six months to March, which accounted for two-thirds of Apple's total revenue.
In Australia, where Apple Pay launched a month ago, payment machines supported by one mid-sized bank reported frequent failures.
"Bendigo Bank is experiencing some unforeseen technical issues in accepting Apple Pay payments at selected merchant terminals," a spokeswoman for the bank told Reuters, adding that a lack of wider industry engagement in launching the service limited the lead time in testing the new technology.
Apple Vice President Jennifer Bailey said such experiences were premature and not representative.
"Like any set of major technology changes, it takes time," she said. "We want to move as quickly as possible, we push it as quickly as possible."
Facing a slowing smartphone business, Apple has taken on the payments market hoping to add ways to make its devices more appealing, and more revenue streams. Apple takes a cut of up to 15 cents in the United States on every $US100 spent.
While it has long mastered the supply chain for its mobile devices, the payments ecosystem has proved harder to control, and banks in other countries have reportedly negotiated lower transaction fees, contributing to its slow global roll-out.
Apple nearly doubled its R&D spending to more than $US8 billion in 2013-15 as it pushed out a wave of new products including Apple Watch and Apple Pay, as well as upgrades to existing hardware devices and new services.
Apple has leveraged its huge US user base to push Pay, but has met resistance in Australia, Britain and Canada where banks are building their own products.
"Payments in general is such a complicated system with so many incumbent providers that revolutionary change like this was not going to happen very quickly," said Joshua Gilbert, an analyst at First Annapolis Consulting.
The upshot: Apple has rolled out Pay in a dribble, adding countries and partners where it can - Hong Kong is expected to be added next - resulting in an uneven banking landscape with users and retail staff not always sure what will work and how.
In Britain, for example, $US14 billion was spent via contactless cards in 2015, according to Windsor Holden, a Juniper Research analyst. That makes it harder to persuade people to take the extra step on their smartphone for the same checkout convenience.
"You have over 86 million contactless cards in circulation, you have to persuade Britons to register their cards to the (Apple Pay) service when they can already use them to make a contactless payment," Holden said.
In Australia, where more than 60 per cent of all card transactions are through contactless cards, reception has also been muted. A spokesman for one large retailer said he had seen "very little uptake of the payment option" in his sector. He didn't want to be named as he was not authorised to speak publicly about the matter.
Diego Machuca, 32, banks with Apple Pay-holdout Commonwealth Bank, has an iPhone and is already "largely cashless".
He says Apple Pay is appealing, but he wouldn't switch banks just to access that one feature. "Not over that. There's too much work involved just for tap-and-go," he told Reuters.
Three months after the China launch, users on online forums complained that using Apple Pay, even at popular fast-food outlets, was not as seamless as local services such as WeChat, Tencent's messaging and mobile commerce phenomenon.
Nonetheless, Apple's approach has spurred development in several markets where the mobile payments industry had previously not taken hold - giving it the jump on rivals Google's Android Pay and Samsung Pay.
Android Pay only launched in the United States in March and in Britain in May for use on the latest model Android phones. Samsung Pay is available in three markets; China, South Korea and the United States.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
I reckon there is a place for Dave and Mike and the Professor to challenge such a huge R&D spend in 13-15. $8 Billion USD ??
No agreement between big banks and Apple Pay
Apple Pay out of reach
Apple Pay: ACCC decides not to grant big banks authority to collectively bargain with Apple
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has decided not to grant Commonwealth Bank, Westpac and NAB interim approval to collectively bargain with Apple over its mobile payment service, Apple Pay.
The banks and other card issuers are seeking authorisation to collectively negotiate on issues including the ability to use Near Field Communication (NFC) on Apple devices to enable contactless payments to be made through the banks' own digital wallets.
Apple Pay, which allows consumers to tap and pay using their phone, is a closed system and does not connect with the systems of other providers. That has become a sticking point with the banks, which have been developing their own 'e-wallet' offerings that Apple is refusing to accept.
Banks charge over $3 billion in fees each year for processing credit and debit card transactions.
In its decision, the ACCC said it took into account the potential for continuing effects on competition in the market, and any possible harm to the applicants or other parties.
"Given the complexity of the issues and the limited time available, the ACCC has decided not to grant interim authorisation at this time," said chairman Rod Sims. "The decision is not indicative of whether or not a draft or final authorisation will be granted."
"The ACCC requires more time to consult and consider the views of industry, consumers, and other interested parties."
The Commission said it expects a draft decision to be released in October 2016. The only member of the Big Four not part of the application is ANZ, which broke away and reached a separate deal with Apple.
Apple was approached for comment but declined, pointing the ABC to its submission to the ACCC made earlier in August against interim authorisation.
In that submission, Apple said the banks' request would "harm consumers, lead to less competition and less innovation, and create a troubling precedent".
"Apple upholds very high security standards for our customers when they use Apple devices to make payments. Providing simple access to the NFC antenna by banking applications would fundamentally diminish the high level of security Apple aims to have on our devices," the submission stated.
A spokesperson on behalf of the applicant banks, which also includes Bendigo and Adelaide Bank, said they would continue to be in consultation with the ACCC up until the final determination is made.
"This application seeks to ensure that Australian customers are able to choose between different mobile wallets to make payments easily," the spokesperson said.
"A number of other Australian institutions have supported the ACCC granting authorisation including Heritage Bank, Tyro and Indue."
POS in crims' sights -
We should protect our card as best we can at the POS.
Secure your card at POS
A Russian cyber-gang, the Oracle MICROS hack, and five more POS makers in crims' sights
Who, what, when, why, how?
12 Aug 2016 at 23:16, Shaun Nichols
When hackers, believed to be a Russian crime gang, broke into Oracle-owned payment terminal biz MICROS, it was assumed the crooks were snooping around other register makers, too.
Well, assume no more: here's five other companies poked and prodded by the crew, with wildly varying degrees of success.
Days after word broke that MICROS had been infiltrated by miscreants, Hold Security tipped off Forbes that POS vendors ECRS, Navy Zebra, PAR Technology, Cin7, and Uniwell were also targeted by the same group.
Alex Holden, CISO for Hold Security, told El Reg that the network breaches all look to have taken place over a two-week period between July 16 and 29 when members of a Russian hacking group infiltrated company web servers and attempted to access customer databases.
"In our investigation after learning about the MICROS breach, we identified a number of victims to the same group," Holden said. "Besides learning about how MICROS was compromised, we saw the hackers target and successfully attack a number of other POS software providers."
Holden said his team witnessed stolen data and backdoor passwords being exchanged in underground forums, with the hackers selling information obtained from MICROS for $10,000.
"Hackers use standard attack tools to install backdoors into web servers of the victims," explained Holden. "Once successful, they would try to gain access to SQL databases and retrieve or download data."
It appears, however, that the attempts at infiltrating the networks of those other companies were by and large far less successful than the ransacking of MICROS.
It was feared that, by compromising the POS vendors, the criminals would be able to remotely access payment terminals in potentially thousands of stores, hotels and restaurants, and snoop on people's bank card details.
However, so far, it appears the main victims were poorly secured web and documentation servers, and no sensitive personal information was directly obtained. It is, of course, possible that any internal documentation or passwords grabbed by the hackers could be leveraged to attack further systems and networks.
Cin7 claims it wasn't hit at all. A spokesperson for the software biz told The Register, "we have not suffered any type of breach in the system," and gave us a copy of the notice founder Danny Ing sent to his customers:
We wanted to let you know that Cin7 has been the target of an unsuccessful cyberattack, which was detected as part of our normal security auditing process. As a further precautionary measure, our protocol in these situations is to recommend you reset your Cin7 password.
We want to reassure you that, as our terms and conditions indicate, Cin7 does not store any credit card information for your business or your customers. We greatly value our business relationship with you, and look forward to many more years of our continued partnership.
Yet Ing apparently told Forbes earlier this week that "malicious code designed to get passwords from the database or operating system" was found on one of its servers. It may have been that the infection was detected and stopped immediately.
Meanwhile, in an email seen by The Register to resellers, Uniwell said: "Recently, a web server which contains public domain information on Uniwell products such as operating and service manuals, installation documents and brochures was breached. There is absolutely no connection between this web server breach and the security of our POS systems."
Uniwell's director of technology Gilmer Pinto told us shops and hotels' Uniwell terminals are not connected to its website's systems, therefore there was no way the hackers could tunnel their way into sales registers and lift card information. "Our ROM-based proprietary POS systems do not fall into a category as other PC-based POS systems that use servers and keep customers' data. Our POS Systems are simply not designed that way," said Pinto.
The biz plans to shut down the compromised uniwell-americas.com server, though, and use other systems to distribute information and manuals.
ECRS was quoted by Forbes as saying the hackers were able to insert malicious code into one of its web portals and may have had access to customer contact information, but "the affected system was segregated from the systems that ECRS uses to facilitate remote access to merchant systems, and the affected system was not used to store sensitive information pertaining to credit card processing."
PAR Technologies, meanwhile, said it was treating the incident "as a non-material event" and that no production data was accessed.
NavyZebra and its parent company BankCard Services said it is investigating the claims, stressing that it does not store any payment card details.
So, as you would expect, the miscreants behind the MICROS hit are indeed probing and infiltrating other sales terminal vendors. Investigative reporter Brian Krebs estimates that the crew, known as the Carbanak Gang, swiped have more than $1bn from banks, shops, hotels, and so on, over the years by hacking payment systems.
Let's hope POS makers are all taking notes. And that their card readers are more secure than their websites. ®
How Naive !!??
allegedly its "Good for Apple. Its their technology."
I guess you meant to say "It's its technology".
Yes we do know about NFC and generally we don't like it because it's not so secure. It may be sexy to tap'n'go for people who think their own time is too relevant to take a few extra seconds to confirm their own money is safe. Apple itself has indicated in a tone of recent articles that there are entities around the finance world that wish to control it (yes - the technology and Apple) to the point where the technology cannot secure your hard-earned money. I assume you know what I mean as you've also earned your money by hard effort, not through sitting at home and trying to crash companies you don't like through the use of social media...
Anyway, here is another article from open-source media that comments on the problem. It clearly recognises there are significant problems with securing this technology. It would be so easy for the big companies to do what they want and let us all carry the risk further downstream.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Apple Says Some Banks Can't Use Apple Pay Technology
You can't touch it!!
Apple doesn’t want to share its Apple Pay wireless payment technology with certain banks.
Four Australian banks had approached the company in July with the hope of gaining access to the NFC chips that are a part of all iPhones and enable users to wirelessly pay for things via Apple Pay.
But Apple AAPL -0.06% is arguing that if the four banks—the Commonwealth Bank of Australia, National Australia Bank, Westpac, and Bendigo and Adelaide Bank—use the NFC chips independently of Apple Pay, it would compromise the phones’ security.
“Providing simple access to the NFC antenna by banking applications would fundamentally diminish the high level of security Apple aims to have on our devices,” the company said in a submission to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC).
If the banks’ apps were to use iPhones’ wireless payment system, they would get a cut of the fees that Apple charges when consumers use Apple Pay. Apple’s response comes after the banks worked with the ACCC to negotiate with the company collectively, forming what Apple called a “cartel.”
In its response, Apple said the main motive of the four banks to use the iPhone’s technology is to preserve their credit card businesses. Australian credit card interest rates are usually around 20%, The Register reports, despite home lending rates currently being below 5%.
Fortune reached out the banks and will update the story if they respond.
Apple Pay is a mess
Mobile Payments Are a Mess
This New App Proves Mobile Payments Are a Mess
Retailers' resistance to adopt Apple Pay and similar services is making life harder for customers.
There was once a time when buying something in a store was simple. You would give a cashier some money or swipe a card, and you’d get your thing and maybe some change and a receipt and be on your way.
No longer. A plethora of new mobile payment services and apps, in combination with the country’s switch to so-called “chip-and-PIN” cards, has left the retail process a confusing mess. Should I swipe or dip my card? Do you accept Apple Pay? What about my rewards points? Oh, forget it, where’s your ATM?
Among the most frustrating elements of our byzantine retail future is stores’ insistence on making their own proprietary apps, rather than adopting services like Apple Pay. That strategy forces users to clutter their phone up with all sorts of retailers’ apps — I’ve got one for Gregory’s Coffee, another for Dig Inn, there’s Hale & Hearty, and so on. Worse, it prevents Apple Pay and its ilk from becoming a solution to the disastrous U.S. rollout of chip-and-PIN technology. Only around one in five Americans regularly use mobile payment apps, a rate that would surely be higher if consumers were more confident they would be accepted everywhere.
Walmart has long been a major offender here, refusing to support Apple Pay and similar services in favor of its own mobile wallet app. Starbucks was a big culprit too, though it recently moved to support Apple Pay (Starbucks’ mobile app is admittedly pretty great, mobile ordering is a treat). Now add CVS to these ranks as well. Rather than adopt Apple Pay et al, the retailer, recently rebranded as CVS Health, introduced Thursday a proprietary payments app of its own.
On some level it’s understandable that retailers might want to maintain their own mobile wallet apps. The data those apps collect is surely invaluable. And Apple Pay has been slow to incorporate retailers’ rewards programs, though that’s slowly changing. And CVS’ app has features that streamline the pharmacy process, which sound like something Apple should include in its own software, given its newfound focus on healthcare. “We’ve been excited by the level of customer adoption of these digital solutions, and we will continue our quick pace of innovation and deployment to make our customers’ health care experience even easier,” said CVS Health SVP and Chief Digital Officer Brian Tilzer in a statement announcing the app.
But in supporting their own services over those that have the potential to become a standard form of mobile payment across stores, these retailers are only making life harder on customers. It’s time for them to get behind the smartphone manufacturers’ efforts — lest we go back to swapping paper and metal currency for goods and services. The horror.