iPhones 'disabled' if Apple detects third-party repairs • Hacker News Board

Re: iPhones 'disabled' if Apple detects third-party repairs

#121

Post by SixSigma » Sat, Feb 06, 2016, 2:17 PM UTC

pjc50 wrote: post #50

The stated rationale is that it's reasonable for a security-critical device to self-destruct if it thinks it may have been tampered with. Unfortunately this is a phone which costs a lot of money and has much of the user's life stored on it. I wouldn't be surprised to see Apple sued over this; I don't know what the interaction of the Sale of Goods Act and remote-bricking is. I was thinking along similar lines recently…

> has much of the user's life stored on it

Stores life in fragile device

Fragile device breaks

Dies

Re: iPhones 'disabled' if Apple detects third-party repairs

#122

Post by DanBC » Sat, Feb 06, 2016, 2:17 PM UTC

venomsnake wrote: post #87

minikites wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's certainly isn't as bad as an ethnic slur, but I feel strongly that it shouldn't be used in polite conversation. It's a matter of being considerate to your audience.

And sugarcoating speech show disdain towards the audience. Anyway - how is the political correct way to retard a dough in a fridge?

Retard has two uses. If you're talking about watch mechanisms or dough in the fridge the word retard is perfectly fine, no-one cares about that use.

The word retard is hate speech, linked to actual real world violence. And that violences is very common.

https://www.mencap.org.uk/sites/default/files/documents/2009...

> A survey by Mencap of people with a learning disability has found that nearly nine out of ten respondents have experienced bullying in the last year. Two-thirds are bullied on a regular basis and almost one-third are suffering from bullying on a daily or weekly basis. People with a learning disability face prejudice and widespread discrimination that often makes them feel like outcasts and prevents them from taking a full part in society. Public attitudes in the United Kingdom towards people with a learning disability remain discriminatory. The Mencap survey suggests that the bullying of people with a learning disability is institutionalised throughout society.

How they described bullying:

> The following behaviours were most frequently cited: kicking, biting, name-calling, teasing, stealing, pushing, threatening, having things thrown at you, being told to leave a building, hitting, being shouted at, swearing, demanding money, hair-pulling, throwing stones, spitting, poking, being punched, being beaten up, having one’s head banged against the wall.

Re: iPhones 'disabled' if Apple detects third-party repairs

#123

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Feb 06, 2016, 2:17 PM UTC

tedmiston wrote: post #97

KhalilK wrote: post #11

Albeit necessary to check the authenticity of components such as the TouchID sensor for security reasons, bricking the phones seems extreme. Why not simply disable Touch ID? This is them asking for a lawsuit.

I wonder if it's really bricked -- could a downgrade to the previous OS version help? (Admittedly, it's not that straightforward for normal consumers.)

[deleted]

Re: iPhones 'disabled' if Apple detects third-party repairs

#124

Post by DanBC » Sat, Feb 06, 2016, 2:20 PM UTC

pjc50 wrote: post #50

The stated rationale is that it's reasonable for a security-critical device to self-destruct if it thinks it may have been tampered with. Unfortunately this is a phone which costs a lot of money and has much of the user's life stored on it. I wouldn't be surprised to see Apple sued over this; I don't know what the interaction of the Sale of Goods Act and remote-bricking is. I was thinking along similar lines recently…

Apple have been accused of copper-bottoming the rules when relatives want to get access to a dead person's phone.

Apple only really need a death certificate and certificates of probate; but Apple insist on different court orders.

So I'm not sure if SOGA etc will affect Apple here.

Re: iPhones 'disabled' if Apple detects third-party repairs

#125

Post by izacus » Sat, Feb 06, 2016, 2:22 PM UTC

brador wrote: post #107

Reason077 wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a lot of stuff that depends on the secure element - in fact the phone would be quite useless without it. In fact, when you first reboot your phone, even contacts cannot be accessed until you authenticate with your passcode to unlock the secure element. Incoming text messages only show the phone number. You're right, however - a Touch ID sensor that cannot be verified should not brick the phone. Apple should j…

The issue is Apple cannot verify a secure touch ID replacement over a compromised touch ID replacement. Without knowing if your replacement is secure the change potentially compromises the security of the whole device. IMO bricking on touch ID issues is extreme, but maximises the security of the device.

How? TouchID is the less secure authentication than password/PIN anyway (which is shown by the fact that you need to enter PIN/Pass right after boot). How would just disabling TouchID auth be a worse option?

Re: iPhones 'disabled' if Apple detects third-party repairs

#126

Post by laverick » Sat, Feb 06, 2016, 2:23 PM UTC

Something suspiciously like this happened to me on a second-hand iPhone 6 I bought a few weeks ago. Talk about crappy timing.

Everything pointed to a software issue, but every repair person I took it to (both apple and non-apple) kept saying it was a hardware fault.

Touch ID stopped working and the phone drains super quickly despite not being in use. Hoping Apple can provide a "fix", not gonna hold my breath though.

Re: iPhones 'disabled' if Apple detects third-party repairs

#127

Post by juliendorra » Sat, Feb 06, 2016, 2:23 PM UTC

venomsnake wrote: post #86

andybak wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your statement could indicate a range of opinions ranging from ones I agree with to those that are merely a fig-leaf for blatant racism. I'm afraid you'll have to express yourself in some more detail and avoid hollow cliches. This is a complex and nuanced debate.

I find the way racism become THE WORST THING in the world wildly amusing. There are 7 000 000 000 people on the planet and all of them are racist. We people are wired to dislike people not like us.

That's exactly because it's a strong, widely shared cognitive bias (wired or not) that it's so important to counter it culturally.

Countering natural behavior with culture is what humans do, for better or worse.

Re: iPhones 'disabled' if Apple detects third-party repairs

#128

Post by soneil » Sat, Feb 06, 2016, 2:23 PM UTC

benevol wrote: post #39

jacquesm wrote: post #4

It's totally dumb that a functioning phone is bricked by an update because of repairs done in the past. Imagine the same thing happening to your car. "Sorry sir, the software update done to your car has now disabled the vehicle because in the past someone not related to x (insert name of car company here) has repaired it, your car is now junk (you can't even resell it) and you'll have to buy a new one". It's just pet…

Remember the woman who proved that Apple consistently slows down sold iPhones with "updates" right before the launch date of a new model? [0] Apple is in the business of selling (overpriced/overengineered) hardware. Their tactics make that very clear. The only problem with that is that there is no real competition in mobile phones anymore, it's just a giant duopoly. Sure, you can switch to Google/Android, which as th…

That was frankly horribly researched. They started off with a supposition, and ignored any data that didn't help prove it.

They completely ignored that a new handset release tends to come in lockstep with a new OS release. This is relevant because it means many, many people are changing the operating characteristics of their existing handsets at the same time - leaving their phone not only not a "known constant", but potentially creating the same results even if a new generation of phone hadn't just appeared at the same time.

Seriously, if you take their graph and replace the labels for each 3g, 3gs, 4, 4s etc, with ios2, 3, 4, 5 .. the data is still accurate, but the take-away assumptions change entirely.

They ignored that geekbench scores show that scores for any given generation stay roughly constant over the phone's lifetime. That's a fantastic set of data that isn't coloured by changing expectations over time.

And they were quite happy to brush off that the samsung numbers showed exactly the same changes over time, as they didn't spike around releases. Completely ignoring that Android has entirely different update strategies (having to wait until your telco 'blesses' the update, etc).

If you look at their graphs, and think of each label as an OS release rather than coinciding with a new handset (which is still accurate), the story it now tells is that ios updates receive much larger adoption in hurry, when compared to adoption of android updates.

Which we already knew. Apple's update strategy is that every compatible handset is able to update "today", whereas android updates are staggered by various levels of support from different mffrs and different providers.

Re: iPhones 'disabled' if Apple detects third-party repairs

#129

Post by petra » Sat, Feb 06, 2016, 2:23 PM UTC

fuzzix wrote: post #64

benevol wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Remember the woman who proved that Apple consistently slows down sold iPhones with "updates" right before the launch date of a new model? [0] Apple is in the business of selling (overpriced/overengineered) hardware. Their tactics make that very clear. The only problem with that is that there is no real competition in mobile phones anymore, it's just a giant duopoly. Sure, you can switch to Google/Android, which as th…

> Remember the woman who proved that Apple consistently slows down sold iPhones with "updates" right before the launch date of a new model? No. Story linked from daily mail (that's not a "source") is more nuanced. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/27/upshot/hold-the-phone-a-bi...

From the link: "The important distinction is of intent. In the benign explanation, a slowdown of old phones is not a specific goal, but merely a side effect of optimizing the operating system for newer hardware"

When we try to judge intent we do judge the context. So let's look at the context: people do know that iPhone updates will probably slow their device(even though Apple doesn't tell them that). And there's no way to stop the nagging update notification (aside from jailbreaking).

So let's not be naive. Maybe it's hard to prove at the legal level, but there's a pretty decent chance that this is intentional by Apple.

EDIT: if you upvote, please explain why you think this is wrong.

Re: iPhones 'disabled' if Apple detects third-party repairs

#130

Post by madeofpalk » Sat, Feb 06, 2016, 2:23 PM UTC

benevol wrote: post #39

jacquesm wrote: post #4

It's totally dumb that a functioning phone is bricked by an update because of repairs done in the past. Imagine the same thing happening to your car. "Sorry sir, the software update done to your car has now disabled the vehicle because in the past someone not related to x (insert name of car company here) has repaired it, your car is now junk (you can't even resell it) and you'll have to buy a new one". It's just pet…

Remember the woman who proved that Apple consistently slows down sold iPhones with "updates" right before the launch date of a new model? [0] Apple is in the business of selling (overpriced/overengineered) hardware. Their tactics make that very clear. The only problem with that is that there is no real competition in mobile phones anymore, it's just a giant duopoly. Sure, you can switch to Google/Android, which as th…

With Microsoft shutting down Windows Phone, Blackberry giving up on making it's own OS, Palm's WebOS now just a TV interface and Firefox OS rightfully shut down, the market has very clearly proven that there is no room for a third mobile OS.

Hell, there's barely any room for a third manufacturer, let along operating systems http://www.theverge.com/2016/2/3/10894200/android-smartphone...