Not arguing that, I completely agree. Jailbreaking for example is only an issue because the companies are so scared of piracy they lock out everyone. Give a guy control over how he makes his device function e.g. the ability to change icons, and give the homebrew fanatics a limited to their registered device freedom to develop only allowing distribution once approved on the target platforms store. this allows homebrewers the tinkering freedom along with an opportunity to make a coin off of worthy apps. As it stands, jailbreaking is technically both legal* and illegal* at the same time as of current rulings and law. this discrepancy can cause legal issues and allow innocent modders to get convicted and guilty hackers to go free depending on the trial.This is one of many cases where the law needs to be scrapped and rewritten to cover things properly and avoid issues such as the example I made.

*Legal because a few jailbreaking court cases were ruled in favor that one has the right to modify their device as they own it.

*Illegal because it is illegal to circumvent copy protection/DRM period.

We need an overhaul so the tech world is up to date law wise

Unfortunately, no. Good encryption has proved a possible solution, but take a page from Sony: Human error on their end cost all units on version 3.55 and below, or units capable of being manually downgraded to 3.55 to be permanently exploited. damage includes piracy, mods while playing online and homebrew (though the later I don’t find to be malicious. I actually think you as a consumer have a right to run your own code on your on device without having to get permission just because of a label like sony or nintendo. The reason your loced is fear of piracy, money makingwithout them getting a dime, and they make a mint off of development kits. for example, the development kit for the nintendo 3ds prices are:
73056 PARTNER-CTR DEBUGGER $2,620

73058 PARTNER-CTR DEBUGGER/CAPTURE (Dual Functionality) $3,950
73065 Nintendo 3DS (Development only) “Panda” USA $324
73066 Nintendo 3DS (Development only) “Panda” EU $324
73067 Nintendo 3DS (Development only) “Panda” AUS $324
73062 Flash Card, 16 Gbits (2 GBytes) CTR $85
73063 Backup Memory, 1Mbit (128 KBytes) Flash CTR $8.35
73064 Backup Memory, 4Mbits (512 KBytes) Flash CTR $10.65.
These may seem odd for a non tech, but basically my best setup if I purchased would be $3,950+$324+$170+$10.65 = 4454.65. This does not include the fact that you must already know how to fluently program, and the cost to even get accepted to develop, or the process to get accepted. $4500 just to make a simple pong game? This is mainly why game consoles are hacked. Unfortunately, piracy is generally a side effect.
Now imagine if programmers had to get permission from Microsoft or Apple for every little program they create? SDK’s would run in the hundreds of thousands! it is unfeasible. This is why there is sometimes good in exploitation, so that companies cannot force control over the device you own). All it takes is a leak of the private keys and all security collapses. As for exploits, many are ToCToU or time of check to time of use. this is an almost impossible thing to fix as it is called a race condition. A hacker has to have deep understanding of the machine to successfully exploit it, but it is not fixable completely and will always be a possible entrypoint. as with any product, digital or physical, it is impossible to make it un-hackable aside from keeping it to yourself.

Implementing some sort of check is an interesting idea. It is probably impossible to stop curious minds from digging around, but attaching fines/punishments to certain types of distribution would definitely act as a deterrent.

That last question is an important one because if something goes wrong and people lose money and there’s someone to blame… well, then that someone is going to be expected to pay people back.

Thanks, Philip. You can find a bit more about FinFisher here: emsi.at/ffish

Moosa Abd-Ali Ali, Jaafar Al Hasabi and Saeed Al-Shehabi, three pro-democracy Bahraini activists who were granted asylum in the U.K., suffered variously from years of harassment and imprisonment. Investigation and analysis by human rights group Bahrain Watch showed that while
Moosa, Jaafar, and Saeed were residing in the U.K., Bahraini authorities targeted the activists and had their computers infected with the surveillance Trojan FinFisher.

The complaint argues that the actions of the Bahraini authorities qualifies as an unlawful interception of communications under section 1 of the U.K.’s Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. By selling and assisting Bahraini authorities, the complaint argues that Gamma is liable as an accessory under the Accessories and Abettors Act 1861 and/or encouraged and assisted the offence under the Serious Crime Act 2007.

( Two PCs were infected and a Apple computer system was infected. They turned up at a meeting in their own country and was arrested. They have been given multiple life sentences and will never see the light of day again. All for the lack of an interactive firewall and an up-to-date virus scanner and a basic understanding of PC security ).