Smartphone IP68 Water Resistance Is Actually Just a Safety Net — The Harsh Reality

The IP68 water resistance rating for smartphones has long been accepted by many consumers as an absolute indicator of “water resistance.” However, voices within the industry are beginning to question this perception. Android Police reporter Jade Bryan Jardinico published an article based on his own experiences, arguing that the IP68 standard is not “absolute protection” but rather just an emergency safety net.

Jardinico has used dozens of water-resistant smartphones over the past decade and conducted actual submersion tests. His first water-resistant device was the Sony Xperia M4 Aqua (IP68), a rating that was rare at the time and only found on flagship models. However, he later experienced two serious water damage incidents with Samsung Galaxy smartphones he owned, which significantly shook his confidence in water resistance.

The Misunderstood Reality of “Waterproof”

The IP (Ingress Protection) standard is a dust and water protection rating defined by the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). IP68 means “complete dust protection” and “protection against continuous immersion in water.” However, Jardinico points out that this gives consumers a false sense of security.

According to him, the IP68 test conditions are limited to “fresh water,” “a specific depth (usually 1.5 meters),” and “a set period (30 minutes).” Real-world environments such as seawater, chlorinated pool water, soapy water, and temperature changes are not considered. Furthermore, seal degradation due to drops or age-related wear is not accounted for.

Given this background, Jardinico evaluates water resistance as “not absolute protection, but an insurance policy at best.” He warns that although manufacturers like OnePlus and Xiaomi, which previously offered non-water-resistant phones, are now racing to adopt IP68/IP69 ratings, consumers should not become overconfident.

Distrust Born from Past Water Damage Incidents

Jardinico’s distrust stems from specific experiences. When he was previously considering upgrading from the Xiaomi Redmi Note 9T to a higher-end model, he chose the Samsung Galaxy A54 with IP67 because the Redmi Note 12 Pro only had a low IP53 (drip-proof) rating. However, he later suffered damage to that Galaxy device and several other smartphones from minor water exposure.

“Seeing IP67 or IP68, I mistakenly believed it was safe to use underwater. The reality is that even a few drops or an accidental dunk can be risky,” he says. This experience transformed his view of water resistance from “nice to have for peace of mind” to “still something you can’t be careless about even if it’s there.”

These experiences highlight a broader industry issue. The IP standard only indicates “protection under test conditions” and is not a guarantee of “withstanding harsh everyday use.” Some argue, much like Anthropic’s release of “Claude Mythos,” that the limits of technology should be clearly communicated.

Manufacturers Urged to Be More Transparent

Jardinico calls on smartphone manufacturers to disclose the test conditions of the IP rating in a way that ordinary consumers can understand. Specifically, he lists the following points:

• Clearly state that resistance to seawater and chlorinated pool water is not guaranteed.
• Warn about the potential reduction in water resistance due to drops or aging.
• Publish statistics on failure causes based on actual repair data.

He also argues, “Manufacturers should stop using IP68 as a marketing advantage and instead focus on improving actual durability.” In particular, foldable smartphones have difficulty waterproofing the hinge area, and the current IP standard is insufficient for them.

This issue applies not only to smartphones but also to many devices that claim to be water-resistant, such as wearables and earphones. Just as Cloudflare acquired VoidZero to strengthen Vite/Astro development, the industry as a whole needs to reconsider its standards.

Editorial Opinion

The issue of smartphone water resistance has been left unresolved for years in the gap between consumer misunderstanding and manufacturer advertising strategies. In the short term, personal stories like this one may spread on social media and shift consumer awareness. Users of IP68-equipped devices may become more cautious, and the trend of avoiding underwater use is likely to grow.

In the long term, manufacturers may be forced to acknowledge the limitations of the IP standard and adopt more realistic test conditions—such as including saltwater or temperature changes. Additionally, attention may shift to other aspects of durability, such as repairability and maintaining water resistance through part replacement. Just as Huawei integrated AI agents into HarmonyOS 7, a shift from simple spec competition to real-world effectiveness is needed in water resistance as well.

From an editorial standpoint, we believe consumers should view IP68 not as “absolute waterproofing” but as a risk reduction measure. Manufacturers should clearly state test conditions and offer long-term quality guarantees that account for aging. The true value of water resistance lies in how well it anticipates device degradation over years.

References

• Why an accidental bathroom dunk proved my phone’s IP68 rating is just a safety net, not a feature - Android Police — Published June 12, 2026