Samsung has decided to proceed with the Bootloader blocking also in Europe, a move that has caused a lot of discussion. Behind this choice is a European regulation that will come into force in August 2025 and which risks changing smartphone usage in Europe forever. This is why other manufacturers may soon follow suit.
From 1 August 2025, new provisions will come into force RED Directive (Radio Equipment Directive), which redefines the compliance requirements for all radio devices sold in Europe. This is a significant change, not so much for the amount of regulations introduced, but for the effect they will have on the entire Android ecosystem. The issue revolves around three articles that impose specific protections: against network interference, personal data compromise, and digital fraud. These are, in themselves, sacrosanct rules.
But the crux comes with the interpretation prevailingEach device must ensure full compliance not only with the hardware, but also with the software that controls the radio modules. This is where the bootloader comes in. Unlocking it essentially allows you to replace the original operating system with an alternative one, such as LineageOS or GrapheneOS.
But these systems, if they modify the radio drivers even minimally, invalidate the CE certification. An uncertified device can no longer be legally marketed or used, at least according to the most stringent reading of the law.
This scenario has therefore led Samsung to protect its devices. Not on a whim, but to avoid any software modifications falling under your legal liability. If a user installs a ROM that interferes with radio frequencies or compromises communications security, the manufacturer (and in some cases the importer) may be held directly liable.
RED does not explicitly talk about unlocking the Bootloader or custom ROM, but it opens one regulatory space in which the margins for maneuver are they narrow. And in doing so, it provides a solid argument for those who have been trying for years to close the loop between hardware, software, and services. After all, customizing the operating system also means breaking away from proprietary services and, therefore, from the model that ties the user to the brand.
Samsung is just the first to move, but it’s hard to imagine it will be the only one. Starting in August 2025, it’s very likely that other manufacturers will follow suit, at least for the European market.
Fuck smart phones and neo feudalism. This is theft of ownership with a criminal complicit government. I applaud all Luigi’s these people deserve it. These are the killers of democracy. If your device only runs factory filtered stalkerware garbage, all democracy is dead. All information is easily filtered by this proprietary shit. Freedom of the press is a bullshit tiny niche of the broader requirement for a fully informed public. The fucking “press” is bullshit to highlight. You must have fully informed citizens and you may not choose how that information is shared or disseminated between citizens. This is not democracy. People are so fucking stupid.
Notice how the article implies Samsung and other corporations don’t want to do this, even though it’s something they’ve wanted to do for a long time? They almost certainly lobbied and ghost wrote most of this legislation to begin with; now they play the victim, even though they’re a perpetrator.
Notice how the article implies Samsung and other corporations don’t want to do this, even though it’s something they’ve wanted to do for a long time?
It’s already disproportionately difficult to just root a Samsung phone, so this change perfectly fits the pattern. (Posting this from a new Samsung phone that I’m desperately trying to root.)
Jesus, how do you people always come up with the most inane conspiracies. I have a company that manufactures devices that communicate wirelessly. The new RED is a huge pain in the ass, along with the CRA.
Absolutely no company pushed for this. The new legislations and directives cause a ton of additional work and obligations for companies, e. g. software has to be certified as part of the compliance check, things that were previously approved via self-reports now involve trusted 3rd parties, and reports of violations to government bodies are now mandatory.
And you know what, even though this costs a bunch of money that could go elsewhere and the whole thing is so new that even the certification bodies have no idea what is going on, even though we have to setup completely new processes, spend endless hours documenting things, I still appreciate both initiatives.
As an end customer, I would love if e. g. the software that runs on the mobile payment terminal taking my card info is certified. I would love if the developer of the software running on the PLC on my shop floor has to check CVEs, inform me about security issues and has to deliver 5 to 10 years of updates.
Not a fan of Samsung and their shitty software, but they’re simply preemptively covering their ass, nothing more.
I’d also still want to unlock my bootloader. I’m sure the whole legal situation will become less muddled, enabling just that.
The whole smart phone thing is such a lesson in letting go of the rope.
Once you let corporations get away with a little, they will eventually take everything.
Every time we lost a bit of control me and a few of enthusiasts were screaming, but the regular populace just shrugged…
Even on reddit you’d have to argue with idiots “oh just use Bluetooth headphones! Oh who needs sd cards, just use the cloud! Oh who needs rooting, it’s not needed”
I swear to god if Windows / OS were invented today 80 of people would just shrug as all control of their PC was taken away.
I have long contended that the computer industry is course-correcting with Android/iOS/mobile. They realized their prior “mistake” of letting people actually own, control, and modify their devices. Apple and iPhone is the worst in this regard.
80 of people would just shrug as all control of their PC was taken away
Isn’t that actually the case? I know of these issues. And around me, I talk about them (without being pushy I hope). At work, the privacy issues with windows are seen as glaring warnings. But beyond that… I’m pretty sure the vase majority of people don’t care. Some are probably even enthusiast to have a “new update”, having no idea what it means.
WTF just happened in Europe in the last few months. We used to be some sort of (dimmly lit) beacon of user freedom and privacy considerations. Now, I know there’s been a push for new legislations that basically fuck individual privacy over, but last I checked it was just a proposal. And now we’re doing a fucking 1260° turn toward full stanglehold on everything.
deleted by creator
this is more or less the impression I get. Like all the shitheads are seeing just how much disgusting illegal shit trump is getting away with and thinking “I could do that too!”
I think it’s the rise of all the nazis - Lepens in France, Hitlerjugend Jimmy in Sweden, Orban,…
This sounds like bullshit.
An uncertified device can no longer be legally marketed or used
Ok, but I’m not marketing my LineageOS phone and I don’t believe Samsung can be responsible for me using it. It sounds like phones with custom ROM will simply lose CE certification (unless the custom ROM is itself certified). Samsung obtains the CE certification and sells certified phone. Making them responsible for anything that happens after that (besides regular updates) is something completely different than what this article talks about. It would basically mean that Samsung has to make sure that their devices cannot be hacked/rooted but ensuring security of hardware and software is something completely different and is covered by different laws. Even the RAD website clearly says this:
“In 2021, the Commission decided to pause the initiative following the announcement of the Cyber Resilience Act (CRA), due to potential overlaps. In 2023, it was agreed that cybersecurity requirements would transfer from the Radio Equipment Directive (RED) to the CRA.”
PC Computers are next
This is why the big deal with TPM
Why TPM is never a removable security device
Why you can’t save your old PC with a usb TPM device,
even though they are low power serial text devicesAnd TPM itself is just the thin side of the wedge.
It will grow more and more capable as an encrypted instructions processor
Eventually applications will run enough of their code
as encrypted instructions that they will become impossible to pirate.This means application on your offline computer will be just as revocable as cloud application
and they will no longer be transferable, cryptographically tied to the processor coreHere is a taste of the future
You CAN’T Jailbreak Your PC
The days of “it’s my hardware, I’ll run what I want” are over.
TPM 2.0, Secure Boot, and Microsoft Pluton are forming a closed execution environment.You can’t replace the bootloader. You can’t flash unsigned firmware. You can’t disable the vendor-approved certificate store.Try to run an unsigned OS, and it will simply refuse to boot.
Your motherboard no longer listens to you.
It listens to Microsoft and OEMs.
You Will Own Nothing, and Even That Nothing Is Tied to Your Old PC
TPM stores your encryption keys in a non-exportable way.
Your files, apps, and even your OS activation are now bound to your specific machine.Want to move them to another system?
Too bad. The TPM won’t let you.
Even if you own both devices.The machine is yours. The data, software, and identity within it are not.
Installing Linux Will Be Illegal (Functionally, If Not Yet Legally)
Secure Boot + Remote Attestation is the death knell for freedom-focused OSes.
Your distro doesn’t carry the "right" signature? Blocked. You modify the kernel for performance or privacy? No longer attested. You write your own OS? You don’t get to boot. It’s not banned in law. It’s banned by cryptographic gatekeeping.
Digital preservation will be technically impossible.
Encrypted execution + hardware-tied software =
No way to archive.
No way to emulate.
No way to restore.Games, apps, creative tools, all gone when the keys expire or the vendor shuts down.
We won’t just lose software. We’ll lose entire cultural eras.
It’s like that Apple ad crushing musical instruments but for your entire digital life
https://adage.com/video/crush-ipad-pro-apple/ (I couldn’t find it unedited on youtube sorry)
You Have No Mouth and Can’t Say NO
Vendor lock-in is no longer a commercial strategy.
It’s cryptographic reality.You can’t deny updates. You can’t run unsigned code. You can’t refuse attestation.Because your software won’t run without it.
The PC has become a compliance terminal. Saying "no" is no longer supported behavior.
A hardware-enforced, cryptographically sealed cage.
Your freedom to compute is being revoked—quietly, efficiently, irreversibly. The illusion of ownership is maintained only until enforcement becomes total. This isn’t theory. It’s shipping now.If we don’t fight back, there will be no root access left to reclaim.
What a fucking bleak run down. But it is the direction things are barreling towards.
Writing this the warning of Cory Doctorow about an upcoming “War on General Computing” was ringing in my head !
And also this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EmstuO0Em8
But he doesn’t talk about the TPM and cryptoprocessor threat or the “war on general computing”, it was in another video that I can’t find right now
I also can’t find the Apple Ad where they crush a piano and other instruments of creation under a giant press to make an ipad
I remember seeing that ad. It was super depressing. I hate what the tech world is coming to, why my next phone will be a dumb phone, I’m trying to buy dvds and keeping my circa 2017 vehicle running for as long as possible
The future is here but it’s not evenly distributed.
Hopefully we can stay alive in the future’s shadow.
They probably want that, but also at the same time, that would kill software development.
They would like it if only their employees were the only priesthood of all software development
As far as I know our contractual law prevent being liable for damage caused by users own usage of a hardware or software. This is why tor browser developers arent in trial as liable for some scams that some users do using their software - because of their contract policy. So this excuse is jot valid - they locked bootloader jot because they are obligated or fear trial just because they do not luke private os which prevent them from harvesesting users data
deleted by creator
what an utter bullshit! will the manufacturer be also directly held liable if someone uses a phone of their brand to make a picture about me without authorization! of fucking course not!
fuck samsung, and all the manufacturers that follow suit, because this is just not needed.
but also fuck the red directive’s decision makers for their unsatiable creep of wanting ever more power over our devices! this is exactly like saying, that there is this illegal thing, and if you are not doing it, but just have the slightest ability to do it, that is also illegal. what the actual fuck! get off my fucking phone you scumbags!!
I hate the fact that the more technologically literate you are, the more you run away from it.
A smartphone with latest android, Gemini, google pay, a smartwatch, ChatGPT and a smart home?
Nope, I would rather have a Linux phone that is mostly incompatible with what is expected of modern smartphones, no AI please! Google pay? Only cash or monero! My watch is very smart, it can telle the time for a few years without a recharge, and nothing else!
Luckily now, the hardware is advanced enough that a linux phone is on the edge of being viable. If I can’t unlock a bootloader and compile my own android rom, I won’t be using Android. What’s interesting the open source alternative, like fdroid is really fully replacing the play store for me.
I am currently on Android as well, but in recent months with more and more OEMs disabling unlocking the bootloader, and google somewhat abandoning AOSP, it seriously seems like my next phone would be a Linux one, which is cool but it sucks.
Has anyone verified what this article says?
Here’s the directive in question: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2014/53/oj/eng It doesn’t seem to imply what the article implies.
Also, here are some things from the discussion on HN
As is usual, there seems to be a massive misunderstanding what the directive is and means. The TLDR is that the directive contains no clauses that compels phone makers to keep the Android bootloader locked or that forbids EU users from unlocking it.
Samsung’s public reasoning might be that disabling unlocking the bootloader because of the directive, but there is nothing in the directive that forces them to lock the bootloader. It does sound like a convenient scapegoat if they don’t want to talk about the real reasons though.
The phone makes who end up disabling the unlocking of bootloaders are all doing so on their own accord, not because some regulation is forcing them to.
Finally, the EU’s broader right-to-repair policies makes it kind of impossible that an outright prohibition of unlocking the bootloader could happen. But of course, nuance doesn’t make people click article titles on the web…
I think it’s Samsung that interpreted the rule at their advantage in a way that sends more devices to the landfill
This is really badly written, and that particularly annoys me because the subject matter is actually important.
The EU is pretty disappointing.
Did you read the directive? https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2014/53/oj/eng
Like how the cellular module is proprietary and locked down, even on something like a Librem phone. Or like how DVD players had to use proprietary software to force comply with DRM.
Good luck applying this sorta lockdown to PCs.
Secure boot force enabled with preset certificates would essentially do that.
Except that would require a rewrite of the PC spec which I’m not sure would work out too well given the existence of loose mainboards for custom builds which ship with no OS by default and expect you to supply the OS yourself, ditto for niche manufacturers like Framework who also offer the option of letting you supply your own OS.
Some systems can bypass secure boot
I don’t understand why the user doing what they want to their own possessions has any impact on the original manufacturer.
Samsung isn’t selling flashed devices as far as I know…
