HP CEO: Blocking third-party ink from printers fights viruses
"Our long-term objective is to make printing a subscription."
crossposted from: https://lemmy.blackeco.com/post/383102
His claims are quickly debunked in the article, as the true reason is, obviously, protecting their IP and subscription model
To put it another way: HP printers are so poorly designed that ink cartridges are vectors for viruses
If you would just continuously use our proprietary, wireless DRM-enabled, subscription disinfectant, the wounds we keep cutting into you will (likely) remain uninfected
Wouldn't have ever been an issue if y'all didn't stick electronics in the ink carts in the first damn place.
All my homies hate HP
epson eco-tank is my new best friend.
I don't get people buying HP printers either. They did make really good printers 2~3 decades ago (absolutely loved my Deskjet 695C and the cartridges weren't really hard to refill), but recently their printers are nothing more than e-waste.
Today you should just get a Brother laser printer.
our HP Envy model lasted ,i shit you not, 5 months.
our epson eco-tank we got after that happily prints away 2 years after we bought it without issue. i think we refilled the colors once, and the black 2 times now. for 10€ a bottle.
Eeeh, I had a black and white (well, black) inkjet from HP in the 90s' and the ink would always dry out. I don't think I ever managed to finish a cartridge on that thing.
Inkjets have always sucked. Lasers all the way, even for colour. And if you want to print photos, go through a lab, it's way cheaper anyway.
Then fuck your insecure firmware too.
What a flaming pile of bullshit: HP is cancer when it comes to consumer printers.
The only reason the attack vector exists in the first place is because they introduced it to price gouge the shit out of their customers.
"...it doesn't"
This problem was solved decades ago: don't have circuits on the ink cartridge.
Exhibit A of why CEOs get paid way too much. He made $22 million in 2022. A CEO should have at least a attic understanding of statements they make to the public. This guy cannot even handle that much.
Way back in the day HP was one of the best technology companies around. They were innovative, produced high quality products, and were a good place to work. It makes me sad that HP is now one of the worst tech companies and has among the strongest anti-consumer attitudes.
We've known what HP is since the 90s, if you still own a HP product it's kind of on you now.
Horseshit
Jfc, what a fucking arrogant asshole. An asshole asshole for saying it, arrogant because he thinks anyone will believe it
Also: brothers at least only blocks the third party inks from working.
Do they think this kind of shit happens in a bubble!? That people who know better don't read the news?? Any time I can, I order Lexmark, Epson, and Brother printers/faxes, as well as Dell and Lenovo PCs/laptops/servers/peripherals to replace anything HP.
Seriously, HP printers are so bad, they've soured me on the whole company, despite not having personality owned one in the past decade. These kinds of predatory, dishonest, anti-consumer practices from the top down is the sign of a company I want no part of.
Brother printers are great. If only because they don't add all the pointless bullshit add-on "features" that everyone else does.
Brother printers, they're just printers. Nothing more, nothing less.
They also take third party ink.
We're kind of locked in to Lexmark for most of our printers, but I thought Brother printers now disallow 3rd-party ink/toner? Not their fax machines though, and still better than HP...
The 10 dollars for 3000 page virus is coming!
What an absurd claim
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Last Thursday, HP CEO Enrique Lores addressed the company's controversial practice of bricking printers when users load them with third-party ink.
That frightening scenario could help explain why HP, which was hit this month with another lawsuit over its Dynamic Security system, insists on deploying it to printers.
HP has issued firmware updates that block printers with such ink cartridges from printing, leading to the above lawsuit (PDF), which is seeking class-action certification.
Still, because chips used in third-party ink cartridges are reprogrammable (their “code can be modified via a resetting tool right in the field,” according to Actionable Intelligence), they’re less secure, the company says.
Further, there's a sense from cybersecurity professionals that Ars spoke with that even if such a threat exists, it would take a high level of resources and skills, which are usually reserved for targeting high-profile victims.
Realistically, the vast majority of individual consumers and businesses shouldn't have serious concerns about ink cartridges being used to hack their machines.
The original article contains 766 words, the summary contains 164 words. Saved 79%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
