313
downvoted for that website's super illegal "pay us to not track you" policy
Unchecked consumer-grade RF signals that are broadcast in every direction are insecure??
Color me shocked!
Hah, jokes on them, I managed to fuck my earbuds' microphones so they're useless now.
I am the sweaty balls man and this happens often
Why are your earbuds... in your pants
my balls and my ears sweat at the same time
So glad I use wired earbuds and refused to buy a phone that didn't support them.
Same. I can't find any Bluetooth headphones whose batteries don't die in 4 or 5 months anyway. Meanwhile my Moondrop wired headphones have been going strong for almost 3 years.
My sony earbuds lasted 5 years before I decided to replace the batteries in them, which cost me $20 and 30 min. I would hope other earbuds wouldnt die in only half a year
To be fair I kept buying models that cost $20 to $30 so maybe the higher end ones would last longer. That said, my Moondrops wired headphones cost the same but are way more reliable.
The site wants to share info with advertisers. I found this to be refreshingly honest.
We and our up to 185 partners use cookies and tracking technologies. Some cookies and data processing are technically necessary, others help us to improve our offer and operate it economically...
Anyway, can we get an archive link?
It’s strange to think about how complicit the public has become with this. You mean to tell me that 185 separate connections to other companies are required for me to… read an article?
Well yeah, they have to hoard your advertising data somehow. How else can they advertise things that you don't need to buy?
You can get/make your own archive link by going to archive.ph and entering the article's URL.
Here's the link for this one: https://archive.ph/wUAQn
Instead of hacking Bluetooth, sounds more effective to be an "advertising partner".
Yep I only use wired...
Wired headphones stay winning
And this is why people wanted headphone jacks... and also why corporations didn't want them.
I mean, there were legitimate technical issues with the standard, especially on smartphones, which is where they really got pushed out. Most other devices do have headphones jacks. If I get a laptop, it's probably got a headphones jack. Radios will have headphones jacks. Get a mixer, it's got a headphones jack. I don't think that the standard is going to vanish anytime soon in general.
I like headphones jacks. I have a ton of 1/8" and 1/4" devices and headphones that I happily use. But they weren't doing it for no reason.
-
From what I've read, the big, driving one that drove them out on smartphones was that the jack just takes up a lot more physical space in the phone than USB-C or Bluetooth. I'd rather just have a thicker phone, but a lot of people wouldn't, and if you're going all over the phone trying to figure out what to eject to buy more space, that's gonna be a big target. For people who do want a jack on smartphones, which invariably have USB-C, you can get a similar effect to having a headphones jack by just leaving a small USB-C audio interface with a headphones jack on the end of your headphones (one with a passthrough USB-C port if you also want to use the USB-C port for charging).
-
A second issue was that the standard didn't have a way to provide power (there was a now-dead extension from many years back, IIRC for MD players, that let a small amount of power be provided with an extra ring). That didn't matter for a long time, as long as your device could put out a strong enough signal to drive headphones of whatever impedance you had. But ANC has started to become popular now, and you need power for ANC. This is really the first time I think that there's a solid reason to want to power headphones.
-
The connection got shorted when plugging things in and out, which could result in loud sound on the membrane.
-
USB-C is designed so that the springy tensioning stuff that's there to keep the connection solid is on the (cheap, easy to replace) cord rather than the (expensive, hard to replace) device; I understand from past reading that this was a major reason that micro-USB replaced mini-USB. Instead of your device wearing out, the cord wears out. Not as much of an issue for headphones as mini-USB, but I think that it's probably fair to say that it's desirable to have the tensioning on the cord side.
-
On USB-C, the right part breaks. One irritation I have with USB-C is that it is...kind of flimsy. Like, it doesn't require that much force pushing on a plug sideways to damage a plug. However
and I don't know if this was a design goal for USB-C, though I suspect it was
my experience has been that if that happens, it's the plug on the (cheap, easy to replace) cord that gets damaged, not the device. I have a television with a headphones jack that I destroyed by tripping over a headphones cord once, because the headphones jack was nice and durable and let me tear components inside the television off. I've damaged several USB-C cables, but I've never damaged the device they're connected to while doing so.
On an interesting note, the standard is extremely old, probably one of the oldest data standards in general use today; the 1/4" mono standard was from phone switchboards in the 1800s.
EDIT: Also, one other perk of using USB-C instead of a built-in headphones jack on a smartphone is that if the DAC on your phone sucks, going the USB-C-audio-interface route means that you can use a different DAC. Can't really change the internal DAC. I don't know about other people, but last phone I had that did have an audio jack would let through a "wub wub wub" sound when I was charging it on USB off my car's 12V cigarette lighter adapter
dirty power, but USB power is often really dirty. Was really obnoxious when feeding my car's stereo via its AUX port. That's very much avoidable for the manufacturer by putting some filtering on the DAC's power supply, maybe needs a capacitor on the thing, but the phone manufacturer didn't do it, maybe to save space or money. That's not something that I can go fix. I eventually worked around it by getting a battery-powered Bluetooth receiver that had a 1/8" headphones jack, cutting the phone's DAC out of the equation. The phone's internal DAC worked fine when the phone wasn't charging, but I wanted to have the phone plugged in for (battery hungry) navigation stuff when I was driving.
Honestly I'd be happy with a phone sporting two USB C ports, one centered and one off to the side where the headphone jack used to be, both fully functional.
I’d rather just have a thicker phone, but a lot of people wouldn’t
I think this is a case where the corporations were telling people what they wanted rather than people really asking for thinner phones. Same thing with bezels, I don't know anyone who asked for the screen to go all the way to the edge (or worse, curve around onto the sides). Apple and Samsung said 'this is what people want' when in fact it was what their marketing department wanted because they wouldn't be able to sell the iGalaxy N+1 if it was slightly thicker or heavier than the iGalaxy N.
I know someone who works somewhat high up at Apple and he told me another reason was that they really wanted to improve the water proofing.
That's great and all but I'm not switching to Bluetooth headphones and I'm definitely not going to fiddle around with dongles every time I switch between listening on my phone and my PC. Phones are gigantic anyways; let my have my headphone jack. I don't think it's a coincidence that all these smartphone manufacturers that ditched the old standard will happily sell you shiny expensive disposable wireless earbuds.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Great post, thank you.
I lot of great points here, I would be on aboard if phone therefore had two USB-C ports as standard
and also why corporations didn't want them.
Exactly! So they can spy on us more!
No, the real reason is it saves a few pennies per phone. They can already spy on us through the internal mic.
It’s always about the money. Everyone else yelling about them spying, they’ll only do that if it makes them more money.
load more comments
(3 replies)
What is that site asking me to agree to? No thanks
There's lots of money to be made by inserting a hardware back door in your product then later disclosing it as an unfixable vulnerability and force your customers to buy new hardware which has the same but different backdoor. Repeat.
Thanks, I hate it. Vulnerable to your competitor red teaming it tho...
... and this is why I don't use bluetooth on anything.
I never have it enabled unless I am in the car driving and need driving directions or listening to music/podcasts. I prefer wired headphones, but manufacturers are making that difficult.
Every spy in my vicinity is going to be dancing to The Meters - Cissy Strut.
A fine choice though.
Awwwwwwwwwwwwww YAH
Namana naanaa, bum darum du da.. dadam da da!
load more comments
(1 replies)
Even if these attacks seem frightening on paper, the ERNW researchers are reassuring: many conditions must be met to carry out an eavesdropping attack. First and foremost, the attacker(s) must be within range of the Bluetooth short-range radio; an attack via the Internet is not possible. They must also carry out several technical steps without attracting attention. And they must have a reason to eavesdrop on the Bluetooth connection, which, according to the discoverers, is only conceivable for a few target people. For example, celebrities, journalists or diplomats, but also political dissidents and employees in security-critical companies are possible targets.
I guess they didn’t point this out because it’s kind of obvious, but it sounds like they also have to actually be on to be exploited. So it’s not going to turn on and start listening to you at least. Definitely concerning, but I’m still gonna be listening to my audio books and podcasts with my wireless headphones.
load more comments
(4 replies)
They said I was mad when they removed the headphone jack - well who’s mad now??! AHAHahahahaaaaaaahhhhcrap it’s me.
I’m still mad. Fuckers.
So how do you determine if your headphones have the vulnerable chip in them?
The flaws, discovered by German cybersecurity firm ERNW and first reported by Heise Online, affect dozens of headphone models from brands such as Sony, JBL, Bose, and Marshall, with no comprehensive firmware fixes available yet.
- Sony WH-1000XM4/5/6, WF-1000XM3/4/5, LinkBuds S, ULT Wear, CH-720N, C500, C510-GFP, XB910N
- Marshall ACTON III, MAJOR V, MINOR IV, MOTIF II, STANMORE III, WOBURN III
- JBL Live Buds 3, Endurance Race 2
- Jabra Elite 8 Active
- Bose QuietComfort Earbuds
- Beyerdynamic Amiron 300
- Jlab Epic Air Sport ANC
- Teufel Airy TWS 2
- MoerLabs EchoBeatz
- Xiaomi Redmi Buds 5 Pro
- earisMax Bluetooth Auracast Sender
ERNW emphasizes that this is only a partial list.
Sony WH-1000XM4/5/6
I don't have one of those, but they're pretty popular as headphones with good ANC.
Jlab Epic Air Sport ANC
I do have those, though.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
According to the article, headphones using a Bluetooth SoC manufactured by Airoha may be vulnerable. So, need to find if your headphones use their SoC.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I was hoping this would allow me to take over Bluetooth speakers that people use while skiing and replace their music with a PSA about how no one wants to hear their music
Most annoying people on the mountain
Or public transit. Or public parks. Or grocery stores.
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2025
313 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
71922 readers
3327 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS