Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

iPhones 'disabled' if Apple detects third-party repairs

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 363 posts

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

#231

Post by walterstucco »

WhyDoiPostHere wrote: post #175
MCRed wrote: post #169

There is a strong bias, and the amazing thing is that its very difficult for the people who have this bias to realize it. As far as they can tell it is fact, and this is in large part because they live in a filter bubble where they only see things that confirm their bias. For example: Articles bashing Steve Jobs get upvoted a lot more than ones praising him. Exactly the opposite for bill Gates. Now if you look at Sla…

For me, the real question is where have all the hackers gone? Years ago, there were high quality contributors here. They all had to go somewhere. When slashdot was dying, it was clear where everyone went (HN and Digg). This time around, it's not clear at all.

they just left. arguing with kids is boring

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

#232

Post by derwiki »

imeron wrote: post #172

Could this be a protection against selling stolen iPhones? As I remember a "broken TouchID" rates pretty high as a shady phone. Does anyone know how does this work? Can you reset a stolen phone or do they just sell those as parts nowdays?

This would be a great theft deterrent, if you could remotely brick your iPhone.

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

#234

Post by tdkl »

paulasmuth wrote: post #182

I'm not sure I understand what exactly happened here. Was it previously possible for non-apple engineers to replace the home button or was it not? The guardian's article seems to suggest it was: "Indeed, the phone may have been working perfectly for weeks or months since a repair or being damaged." If that is the case and it was possible to replace these sensors before, apple's narrative that the "error 53" code was…

You can get the button exchanged, but since each one is coupled with the secure enclave co-processor, touch ID doesn't work anymore. But home button still works, so does the phone encryption, you just can't identify yourself with the fingerprint anymore. If you go and try to add a fingerprint, it behaves like you have a muddy finger and can't scan it. But this ain't an issue since encryption is done by a PIN code first, then fingerprints are used as a more convenient way to unlock.

Frankly the device bricking is BS, since the encryption PIN code is still there and unknown to a possible attacker. You just can't use the victims fingerprints to unlock it anymore, or attach a hacked fingerprint reader, because it still won't be able to access the secure enclave to open and get the PIN code.

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

#237

Post by integraton »

niccaluim wrote: post #229
integraton wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely. There are jobs that discriminate against people with eyesight disabilities (some aircraft pilot jobs, for example) and there are many products that don't account for people wearing glasses. People with glasses are widely stereotyped as nerds or geeks and often experience bullying. People wearing glasses were also reportedly targeted in mass killings by the Khmer Rouge due to that same stereotype.

It's not discrimination if the ability in question is a bona fide occupational qualification. If you can't see well, you can't fly safely.

Physical ability and job qualifications are a central issue in the debate about discrimination in hiring. It's not just limited to disabilities, since the same debate has repeatedly taken place around the issue of whether women are physically qualified for certain jobs, as can be seen in the current debate over whether women are physically qualified for special operations roles in the US military.

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

#238

Post by mikeash »

petra wrote: post #223
mikeash wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Software getting slower with updates is a fact of life. It's been an obvious and expected thing since I started being aware of computers and updates in the late 1980s and I'm sure it was a thing even before that. The odds that Apple is doing this on purpose, rather than as a standard side effect of cramming ever more features into their stuff, are so low it doesn't bear more than a moment's consideration. What's next…

I'm not arguing against the update making the device slower. But the fact it's built so people would upgrade(via irremovable nagging), even when it's clearly not what's best for them.

Huh? Of course you're not arguing against the update making the device slower. You're arguing that the update not only makes the device slower, but that this is a deliberate action by Apple to make older devices slower. And I'm saying that's ridiculous since it happens to pretty much all software anyway and all Apple would have to do to make this happen is just develop updates the same way everyone else does.

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

#239

Post by salgernon »

ntakasaki wrote: post #204
salgernon wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Second, Apple can provide an option to replace the fingerprint chip and charge, $150-$200 or whatever it costs for it. At the end of the article, it said that affected customers should contact Apple Support. Are you sure they are not offering a hardware fix at that point? It doesn't sound to me like they're just letting people hang.

From a different article: >When Olmos, who says he has spent thousands of pounds on Apple products over the years, took it to an Apple store in London, staff told him there was nothing they could do, and that his phone was now junk. He had to pay £270 for a replacement and is furious.

There is a failure in the apple stores vs phone support. I went to two Apple stores to try to get my watch band replaced or fixed under warranty and was told by both of them "no way no how" - but phone support had no problem replacing the band.

I find the stores are somewhat inconsistent in their application of policy. (Particular if the policy isn't well defined ahead of time, as in this case)

(As an aside, the practice of requiring an appointment to talk to a support person or even just drop off a broken computer is maddening.)

Post reply on HN