I think it’s far more common for devices to get pairing wrong than to get it right.
Just a few of the very common issues I’ve seen in various devices:
- TVs that are constantly in discoverable mode, even when the screen is off. Just in case the owner loses their remote and wants to pair a new one without reaching behind the TV to press a button. No way of avoiding this except disabling Bluetooth entirely, which makes the stock remote lose either partial or all functionality. Pairing requests also interrupt whatever you’re watching.
- Audio devices that have a very short delay after turning on and waiting for any already-paired devices to connect before switching over to a pairing mode instead. So short that a smartphone in a low-power state (e.g. because you haven’t unlocked it for a few minutes) might not connect in time. Most if not all of the bluetooth-to-3.5mm receivers intended for older cars seem to share this problem.
- Pairing codes are extremely underused in general, even among input devices. Most things seem to just pair with whoever sends a request first unconditionally.
Auth@lemmy.world 10 hours ago
A lot of people genuinely find Fast Pair to be a big improvement over traditional Bluetooth pairing. So why is it such a bad idea for a company to design a protocol that solves the problem? Also Bluetooth pairing has had its own share of vulnerabilities over the years this issue isnt really unique to Fast Pair.
fort_burp@feddit.nl 10 hours ago
To each their own, no doubt. Personally I’m just in awe at how modern tech actually makes people tech-illiterate, and seemingly at a faster clip each year. Throw in an additional attack surface and that just makes it, for me, net minus. There are social and political implications to being tech-illiterate and tech-dependent (especially dependent on foreign and/or rogue states), which is another minus in my book.