Closed Bug 1084540 Opened 7 years ago Closed 6 years ago
My Device] Implement anti theft deterrent aka Kill-Switch for Firefox OS devices
User safety and security is impacted with the increase in "Smartphone theft". While FindMyDevice helps alleviate the impact of stolen phones by providing the user a means to track and secure their data via remote erase, having an theft deterrent has shown to be very effective in reducing the incentive to steal a device. Reports  have shown that with the anti-theft feature in the iPhones, there has been significant reduction in iPhone theft Certain cities  have also mandated an anti theft deterrent in smartphones This meta bug is to track the implementation of the anti-theft feature for firefox OS devices. The feature will be provided as part of FindMyDevice and will be predicated on the user creating a Firefox Account. Detailed requirements will be captured in separate bugs and attached to this meta bug Additional reading:  http://9to5mac.com/2014/06/18/police-ios-7s-activation-lock-has-helped-reduce-iphone-theft-in-some-cities/  http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/face /billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140SB962
No description provided.
Hi, Erin, are you working on FMD? May I know the engineering plan on this bug? Thanks.
Decide to remove the feature-b2g:2.2+ flag, but we can continue working on it and land it to master/m-c. Thanks.
feature-b2g: 2.2+ → ---
Hi Kevin - Erin is not working on FMD right now. Pinging Vishy, who is a better contact for the future.
Flags: needinfo?(elancaster) → needinfo?(vkrishnamoorthy)
Hi this is Mika from legal. Vishy asked me whether the "kill switch" feature is required by law for phones distributed in the USA. The answer is - yes. As of today, two states in the USA (California and Minnesota) have passed laws that require this functionality for smartphones sold to users in their states after July 1, 2015. This effectively means that it's a requirement for any smartphone intended for sale in the USA after that date. Also, the law specifies that the feature must be enabled by default and presented to the user during first time run. The user should have the option to disable. Let me know if you have any specific questions. mika
Hi Gregor, I heard that you will be taking care of "kill switch" for feature phone launch. Just edited the assignee to you. Please also be aware that a we need 2.2 based for device launch because partners are taking 2.2 as base. Once there's a device branch created I'll let you know.
Assignee: nobody → anygregor
2.2R branch was created (bug 1177598). ETA for the features is Sep/30 in order to meet commercial schedule. Gregor or Vishy, are we confident to commit the ETA?
(In reply to Wesley Huang [:wesley_huang] (EPM) (NI me) from comment #5) > Hi Gregor, > I heard that you will be taking care of "kill switch" for feature phone > launch. > Just edited the assignee to you. > Please also be aware that a we need 2.2 based for device launch because > partners are taking 2.2 as base. > Once there's a device branch created I'll let you know. I will just take care of the FMD parts. All the other parts are owned by other teams.
> I will just take care of the FMD parts. All the other parts are owned by > other teams. Hi Gregor, Do you mean bugs other than the "depends on" list (1170629 1175617 1175620 1175623 1175625 1175627)?
I can't access bug 1170629 so I don't think I am responsible for it. Basically we will take care of all dependencies with [systemsfe] in the whiteboard. Bugs like 1175623 or belong to other teams.
:gwagner the bug 1170629 is a legal bug :wesley the backend work will be done by the services team jrconlin. We need to identify additional resources for settings, lockscreen etc..
(In reply to firstname.lastname@example.org [:Vishy] from comment #10) > :gwagner the bug 1170629 is a legal bug > :wesley the backend work will be done by the services team jrconlin. > We need to identify additional resources for settings, lockscreen etc.. I See. Dialer (bug 1175625): needinfo-ing to Francisco, but I wonder if we need this for RedTai. Isn't the partner replacing with their customized UI? Are we creating it as reference for partner? FTU (bug 1175617): similar question as above, do we really need it? Lockscreen (Bug 1175623): need lockscreen resource. Website (Bug 1175620): didn't see much activity on bug. Which team supposedly will look into it?
flagging email@example.com for UX
Hi Wesley, JRconlin is working on the website changes
I've been answering the UX questions within the individual bugs, so I'll remove the NI? on this bug.
Updated to reflect 2.6 requirements in the KS PRD: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Mlaa2rrJdEudOUsSNebd58s-3NGyKyc2ssHTIILcL0o/edit#
blocking-b2g: --- → 2.6+
feature-b2g: 2.2r+ → 2.6+
ux-b2g: 2.2 → ---
Assignee: anygregor → nobody
blocking-b2g: 2.6+ → ---
feature-b2g: 2.6+ → ---
I have fix. It's more a hack because the problem is inside vendor libraries so we cannot fix it, and it's pretty ugly but it works and it's very simple. Alexandre told me that we should test playing a track without offloading support to ensure that all cases are working, the point is that we don't really know how to test such a thing... any guide would be appreciated :)
Assignee: nobody → jgomez
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
ok, sorry for that! This was not the bug I fixed :P ....
Assignee: jgomez → nobody
Status: ASSIGNED → UNCONFIRMED
Ever confirmed: false
Status: UNCONFIRMED → RESOLVED
Closed: 6 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.