Measuring human exposure to 5G | IEC e-tech | Issue’ 03/2019


Measuring human exposure to 5G:

IEC TC 106 is playing a key role with the recent publication of a new IEC Technical Report on evaluating human exposure to radio frequency fields in the vicinity of base stations…

IEC 62232 provides methods for determining the radio-frequency field strength near radio-communication base stations with the intention of evaluating human exposure. It takes into account the mmWave frequencies to be used for 5G networks.”

Source: Measuring human exposure to 5G | IEC e-tech | Issue’ 03/2019

Apple AC Wall Plug Adapter Recall (reminder)


UPDATE NOTE: This is an older recall, going back to 2016. If you have already participated in the recall then further action is not necessary.

“Apple has determined that, in very rare cases, the two prong Apple AC wall plug adapters designed for use in Continental Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Korea, Argentina and Brazil may break and create a risk of electrical shock if touched. These wall plug adapters shipped from 2003 to 2015 with Mac and certain iOS devices, and were also included in the Apple World Travel Adapter Kit.”

“This recall covers the two prong plug portion of the Apple AC power supply (wall plug adapters) designed for use in Continental Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Argentina, South Korea and Brazil.”

“Apple’s website advises that in very rare cases, the two prong wall plugs designed for continental Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Korea, Argentina and Brazil can break and create a shock hazard. So the company will exchange the part at no charge. “

Customer Letter – Apple Feb 16, 2017


Extract from a letter from Apple to its customers about a US court order threat to its iPhone encryption:

 

Specifically, the FBI wants us to make a new version of the iPhone operating system, circumventing several important security features, and install it on an iPhone recovered during the investigation. In the wrong hands, this software — which does not exist today — would have the potential to unlock any iPhone in someone’s physical possession.

The FBI may use different words to describe this tool, but make no mistake: Building a version of iOS that bypasses security in this way would undeniably create a backdoor. And while the government may argue that its use would be limited to this case, there is no way to guarantee such control.

The Threat to Data Security

Some would argue that building a backdoor for just one iPhone is a simple, clean-cut solution. But it ignores both the basics of digital security and the significance of what the government is demanding in this case.In today’s digital world, the “key” to an encrypted system is a piece of information that unlocks the data, and it is only as secure as the protections around it. Once the information is known, or a way to bypass the code is revealed, the encryption can be defeated by anyone with that knowledge.

The government suggests this tool could only be used once, on one phone. But that’s simply not true. Once created, the technique could be used over and over again, on any number of devices. In the physical world, it would be the equivalent of a master key, capable of opening hundreds of millions of locks — from restaurants and banks to stores and homes. No reasonable person would find that acceptable.

The government is asking Apple to hack our own users and undermine decades of security advancements that protect our customers — including tens of millions of American citizens — from sophisticated hackers and cybercriminals. The same engineers who built strong encryption into the iPhone to protect our users would, ironically, be ordered to weaken those protections and make our users less safe.

We can find no precedent for an American company being forced to expose its customers to a greater risk of attack. For years, cryptologists and national security experts have been warning against weakening encryption. Doing so would hurt only the well-meaning and law-abiding citizens who rely on companies like Apple to protect their data. Criminals and bad actors will still encrypt, using tools that are readily available to them.

Source: Customer Letter – Apple

ISPCE 2016, Anaheim California May 16-18, 2016


IEEE Symposium on Product Compliance Engineering (ISPCE)

The Mission of the ISPCE it to provide a forum for product safety engineers and design engineers to discuss and disseminate technical information related to product safety, to enhance personal product safety engineering skills, and to provide product safety engineering outreach to engineers, students and others with an interest in this field as well as the related fields of product safety regulatory compliance.

2016 Preliminary Program: http://2016.psessymposium.org/program

Registration: http://2016.psessymposium.org/registration

Source: Welcome | Conference Starup

Australia Safety Recall: Microsoft Corporation—Microsoft AC Power Cordset for Surface Pro, Pro 2 & Selected Pro 3 Models


What are the defects?

The AC supply flexible cord of the cordset can fail at the entry to the appliance connector where it plugs into the power supply unit for the device, or at the entry to the power socket.

What are the hazards?

Risk of electric shock and fire.

Source: Microsoft Corporation—Microsoft AC Power Cordset for Surface Pro, Pro 2 & Selected Pro 3 Models

Dell offers to fix laptops that smell like cat pee


Dell offers to fix laptops that smell like cat pee.

Everyone knows the internet is all about cats, but Dell may have taken that too literally with one of its new computers. The company this week issued one of the funniest customer service notes in the world of tech when it offered to replace a part in laptops that smell like cat urine.

See Dell’s post here

 

80+ Silver Power Supply Units set to be the new normal. – PC & Tech Authority


The major thing is that from October first pretty much all power supplies sold in Australia will have to sport a minimum 80+ Silver efficiency rating, thus knocking a large number of budget units off the market altogether.

via 80+ Silver Power Supply Units set to be the new normal. – PC & Tech Authority.

ACMA – New single compliance mark–RCM replaces C-Tick and A-Tick from today


ACMA – New single compliance mark–RCM.

Announcement

Single compliance mark scheme begins

The Australian Communications and Media Authority has today introduced a single compliance mark (RCM) to illustrate a device’s compliance with all applicable ACMA standards—telecommunications, radiocommunications, electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) and electromagnetic energy (EME). The C-Tick and A-Tick compliance marks are being phased out.

Revised Update on Australia’s RCM for electrical equipment and ACMA’s regulations


This update has been revised on 2012-07-11 with new information. If you reviewed it before, please review it again now.

Until the official commencement of the EESS, some suppliers may wish to transition to the RCM sooner, to simplify production schedules. This is presently possible, with some limitations and conditions, under the legacy rules (excluding telecommunications products), but is not possible under the new rules until 1 March 2013. Please note the following issues related to this:

  1. The new AS/NZS 4417.1 & AS/NZS 4417.2 edition: 2012 standards were published on 29 June 2012. These will replace all of the earlier editions and parts of 4417.x on the 1st March 2013 (refer to the preface in the standards). Until then the RCM process requirements are unchanged, and the existing 2009 edition documents with their associated amendments continue to apply.
  2. The EESS registration database is not in production at the time of writing and cannot be used for official purposes, even though there’s a link to an evaluation version on the ERAC web site. The EESS database may be available for trial registrations later in 2012, but I’m advised these trial registrations will not have regulatory effect. If suppliers use the trial registration system, they will still need to re-register when the official database is cut over.
  3. The advice at this time is that the 2012 edition of AS/NZS 4417.1 cannot be used for EESS or ACMA purposes until 1 March 2013. The Preface says the 2012 edition “supersedes the 2009 edition … on 1 March 2013”. It does not say the 2012 edition can’t be used before that date. However regulators indicate that the 2009 editions and the associated legacy processes will remain in place until 1 March 2013.
  4. The 2009 edition legacy RCM standards can still be used until 1 March 2013, when the EESS is scheduled to commence, as they are currently being used up to now. The RCM registrar will continue to allow new supplier registrations up to the time the EESS commences. New-supplier registrations on the old system will terminate when the EESS process has officially begun.
  5. Note that under the 2009 edition legacy requirements, a level 1 electrical article under the EESS scheme (i.e non-declared electrical article) is required to have a Certificate of Suitability (or equivalent) from an Australian electrical safety authority before the RCM can be used. This applies too for EMC or radio-communications purposes (note that the legacy requirements don’t apply to telecommunications regulations). For battery-powered or ELV-powered EMC or radio-communications products, a Certificate of Suitability is not required, since it’s not mains-powered, thus out of scope of AS/NZS 4417.2:2009 (+Amdt1)
  6. Telecommunications products can’t use the RCM in lieu of the A-Tick mark until ACMA updates the relevant Telecommunications Labelling Notice (TLN) to give it legal effect, and formal registrations have commenced under the EESS. See the following web site: http://www.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD/pc=PC_312467 for links to the various labelling notices managed by ACMA.
  7. Also under the legacy requirements, the supplier identification needs to be marked with the RCM on the products (this won’t be required under the 2012 RCM standard). This does allow several alternative forms of supplier ID, such as the company logo of the responsible company. It doesn’t have to be the registered supplier code number specifically

I hope this is clear. If you have any questions please let me know or leave a commen

Updated V6b overview document

%d bloggers like this: