Live data from Hacker News

iPhones 'disabled' if Apple detects third-party repairs

theguardian.com

271–280 of 363 posts

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

#271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your reading is correct. But there's always going to be people complaining about word choice even if your meaning is perfectly clear and inoffensive.

That may be true but it does not cost me anything at all to change the text so that it does not offend and in that sense it is an improvement. At the same time I see HN slide towards reddit just one little bit more with all the 'you insensitive clod' comments lately and that is sad too.

Of course, you'll only be changing text to accommodate people who are vocal about what offends them.

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

#272
post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your analogy is way off. This is more like your Tesla car's keyfob misfunctioning and you get it repaired by a non-Tesla dealer. The dealer could've put in a backdoor to get into the vehicle. Tesla releases a big new update for their car software and now your Tesla is completely bricked and Tesla refuses to repair it, saying you have to buy a new car. Is that acceptable?

Almost, except the Tesla store just says you have to buy a new (authentic) key fob rather than a new car. Apple or other authorized repair shops can still fix phones that have been disabled due to security chain errors.

I don't think so, see my other comment.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11048311

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

#273

>retarded Don't say this.

To counter the explosion of "fuck you" kind of comments, and as the father of a child with a developmental disability, thank you for pointing out this impolite and linguistically lazy behavior. People who use "retarded", "gay", "autistic", "ghetto" (and so on) in a derogatory form are showing a lack of imagination, aren't introspective enough to consider how their choice of words makes others perceive them, and trivi…

Thank you for writing that. It is very well stated.

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

#274

I posted this earlier today, but the current article (from bbc.co.uk) does a poor job covering the issue. In summary, Apple iOS uses a validation system to ensure Touch ID sensor is not maliciously replaced or modified. The Touch ID sensor has access to the iPhone Security Enclave, where fingerprint data is kept. A malicious sensor could, hypothetically, steal fingerprints from an iPhone user unknowingly. This could…

What you didn't mention is that this verification only happens on a software upgrade. In the meantime either one of these two things could happen (I don't know which): 1. The sensor could do all the malicious things you mention 2. The sensor is blocked from accessing the security enclave. The former doesn't seem like a secure solution that one should be really glad of. The latter would also be possible after a softwa…

My mistake, added that part into the parent post. The coverage of this story is all over the place and it's hard to keep track.

You are right though, allowing users to update/restore but disabling the sensor is a better solution. I'm not too sure why Apple chose this route. They haven't commented on the technical reasons behind it so it's hard to say for sure.

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

#275
post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Please contact apple secure support to confirm that your device is still secure There's no way the customer or Apple can do that with third party hardware installed. The only solution I can see is to disable all of the features relying on Touch ID.

If they can issue an auth code for apple hardware then presumably it's possible to issue one for non apple hardware. They just have to make some effort to confirm the owner of the phone has it rather than a thief.

I'm sure no nation-state level actor would ever infiltrate this process..

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

#276
post #211
post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for taking the time to share. I personally am aware of zero instances where anyone associated with a developmental disability is comfortable with the use of the word 'retarded', in any context. (Please note: this is not to say such a thing does not exist!) Empathy is a worthy reason for voluntarily restricting my personal speech, and I appreciate others willing to take people like you into consideration her…

In any context ? Seriously ? (genuinely curious...) You are suggesting that they would be uncomfortable with: "we applied the fire retardant at the base of the flames..." "the growth process was retarded by the application of too much nitrogen fertilizer..." "his social development was retarded by the lack of same age peers in his neighborhood..." Again, genuinely curious - are we expected to contort our language aro…

I'll take you at your word that you're not trying to be clever, and that you're genuinely curious, and thus not interested in an argument that must be won. And, so, I'll do my best to elucidate in an attempt to satisfy that curiosity.

I suspect that the poster is referring to the whole of his experience as the pool of contexts in question, and thus can state that he knows of no one who is comfortable with the word choice - given that most people don't use the word "retarded" as the past tense of the verb "retard", which means to hold back or slow down, I'm inclined to agree.

Retardant is not in question. The use of retard as a verb as it's intended to be used is not in question. The vast majority of utterances of "retarded" are used as a pejorative adjective, so while I see your point, I think you're missing his: The reality is that the adjective form of retarded is, in nearly all common-use cases, a careless diminution of those with developmental or learning disabilities, as it serves to suggest the idea/thing/person could only have come from someone with such a developmental or learning disability.

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

#277

I posted this earlier today, but the current article (from bbc.co.uk) does a poor job covering the issue. In summary, Apple iOS uses a validation system to ensure Touch ID sensor is not maliciously replaced or modified. The Touch ID sensor has access to the iPhone Security Enclave, where fingerprint data is kept. A malicious sensor could, hypothetically, steal fingerprints from an iPhone user unknowingly. This could…

> The Touch ID sensor has access to the iPhone Security Enclave, where fingerprint data is kept. A malicious sensor could, hypothetically, steal fingerprints from an iPhone user unknowingly.

No, the CPU reads encrypted data from the sensor and sends them to the SE for decryption and analysis. See the PDF linked here by somebody. What a malicious sensor could do is store user's fingerprint for retrieval by unauthorized parties.

> If the validation fails, the device will function mostly fine, although with Touch ID disabled.

On iOS 8. Once the device is updated to v9, it turns into brick. Quoting from OP:

"They repaired the screen and home button, and it worked perfectly." He says he thought no more about it, until he was sent the standard notification by Apple inviting him to install the latest software. He accepted the upgrade, but within seconds the phone was displaying “error 53” and was, in effect, dead. When Olmos (...) 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.

> If a customer encounters Error 53, we encourage them to contact Apple Support.

This may be a media-friendly euphemism for "it's dead", unless this London staff was clueless.

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

#278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To counter the explosion of "fuck you" kind of comments, and as the father of a child with a developmental disability, thank you for pointing out this impolite and linguistically lazy behavior. People who use "retarded", "gay", "autistic", "ghetto" (and so on) in a derogatory form are showing a lack of imagination, aren't introspective enough to consider how their choice of words makes others perceive them, and trivi…

>when one is actually expressing an opinion that the person or thing is not worthy of merit, and history is rife with abuses that result from trivializing a group of people by distilling that group to a pejorative. What I don't quite understand is why it trivializes people to use a disability as a pejorative, but it apparently doesn't trivialize people to use a disease as a pejorative.

Since you don't seem to be arguing, I would like to understand what you mean? Did I use such a pejorative? I'd sincerely like to know - if, that is, your query is sincere as well.

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

#279
post #67
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you can't say anything anymore in the us because of the pc police

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.

well that's the problem

you can't say anything anymore without qualifying it to the nth degree and sugarcoating it and making it as bland as possible, just in case someone somewhere feels that some thing you said was some how offending

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

#280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I wonder if that isn't the case. If that's true, that would be a shame, but I can't blame them.
Post reply on HN