5 ms·

Didn't Apple testify that allowing third-party repairs would risk user security/privacy? If Apple can't be trusted either, and has to be sued before making thin

Didn't Apple testify that allowing third-party repairs would risk user security/privacy? If Apple can't be trusted either, and has to be sued before making things right, isn't the testimony superfluous? This another example why nudes and so forth should never make it onto a digital device. If that's your kink, then Polaroid cameras and camcorders exist.

fastball 5y ago
Or just keep sensitive things in an encrypted container. Pretty easy to set up an encrypted sparsebundle on a mac for all your naughty photo needs!
wongarsu 5y ago
> If that's your kink, then Polaroid cameras and camcorders exist. That sounds a bit like the Onion sketch "Google allows you to opt-out of tracking by moving to remote mountain village" [1]. This case proves that the criminal justice system works to protect your personal images, we just need a better way to be notified when it happens (the kind of action you would expect Apple to take if they cared, instead of "we continued to strengthen our vendor protocols") 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMChO0qNbkY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMChO0qNbkY
- khuey 5y ago
  The story doesn't mention anything about any criminal charges. The only reason they got caught is because they uploaded the pictures/videos to her Facebook. If they had sent them to a porn site instead they would have gotten away with it. The grandparent is largely correct, if sexually explicit photos/videos of you make it onto a digital device controlling their distribution is difficult at best.
emsy 5y ago
This should be the top voted commen. This is similar to their claims about App Store security, on which they continuously fail to deliver. They want absolute control but don't give you absolute security and they are only ever liable if you take them to court personally (and who wants to take the worlds biggest company to court really?).
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  Lawyers, accountants, auto mechanics, plumbers, pretty much all every professional that gets access to people's private documents or spaces draws the line for professional discretion in the vicinity of "unless it's child abuse or you're plotting an obvious terrorist attack I didn't see anything" Why the does tech get a low bar?
- HatchedLake721 5y ago
  Absolute security never existed, doesn't exist today and will never exist in the future.
  - hexis 5y ago
    Then Apple should stop trying to sell it.
    - HatchedLake721 5y ago
      And where exactly does Apple sell it?
      - emsy 5y ago
        Did you hear about the epic trial?
    - tantalor 5y ago
      I think you are confusing privacy and security. Apple does tout absolute privacy: https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/07/04/apples-iphone-privacy-ad-campaign-continues-with-new-billboards https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/07/04/apples-iphone-pri...
RegnisGnaw 5y ago
Breaking news, nothing is 100%.
- teekert 5y ago
  Well, I bet they won't bring out the Cellebrite stuff when you refuse to unlock your phone.
  - wizzwizz4 5y ago
    Cellebrite only works if you've unlocked it, anyway.
teekert 5y ago
The thing should be fixable without access to personal data, right? How hard can it be.
XorNot 5y ago
> This another example why nudes and so forth should never make it onto a digital device. If that's your kink, then Polaroid cameras and camcorders exist. This might be the only surefire way now, but it's not how it should be. How it should be is that a HIIPA-like wrath of god may descend on you if it turns out you mishandle someone's data like this.
- jedimastert 5y ago
  Aside from this, this could be applied to US Code 1801, "video voyeurism", which seems to apply to "capture...or "broadcast"" and/or "revenge porn" law. Can be charged as a felony and can land you on the sex offender registry.
- viciousvoxel 5y ago
  I want to agree with you, but with caveats; HIPAA systems need to be certified to be secure to a certain degree and are specifically meant to handle sensitive PII data. While Apple could eat the cost of accreditation, it would be a significant burden to require your average IT/PC repair shop to do so. It would also mean opening yourself up to significant liability every time you work on someone's computer, so there would probably have to be some kind of malpractice insurance. I think there's probably a middle ground in there somewhere, but I don't know what it is.
  - sircastor 5y ago
    I briefly thought how much additional complexity and process the rest of the software industry would have to go through, to accomplish HIPPA-like compliance, and then I thought how great it would be if everything were like that.
- gadders 5y ago
  I had a friend of a friend that, in the old days where you used to have to get your photo films developed at a shop, used to keep a copy of anything featuring nudity. I think he had a stack about 2" thick.
hanniabu 5y ago
One more reason for users to have the right to repair
dahart 5y ago
> This is another example why nudes and so forth should never make it onto a digital device. This is true, but focusing on nudes is somewhat missing the real point (and could be interpreted as victim blaming): this story is another example why your email and bank information should never make it on to a digital device. If pictures aren’t safe, then no information is safe. We all have chosen to put information on our devices that is not safe to publish.
- zamalek 5y ago
  > could be interpreted as victim blaming Just to be clear: definitely not my intention. The victim is not in any way at fault here, this story is yet another warning to the rest of us. > then no information is safe This is definitely true. When I was still on Facebook, I intentionally changed my profile to public (because it ultimately is), and only shared information I was comfortable with the world knowing. Now that you've made this point, off the top of my head, I have realized that my digital footprint has grown more innocuous (apart from taxes and BS like that).
- thaumasiotes 5y ago
  > focusing on nudes is somewhat missing the real point (and could be interpreted as victim blaming): this story is another example why your email and bank information should never make it on to a digital device Assuming that focusing on nudes is victim blaming: how is focusing on email less problematic than that?
virgil_disgr4ce 5y ago
> This another example why nudes and so forth should never make it onto a digital device Wow, really? Better make sure you don't dress 'provocatively' while you're at it otherwise you were asking for it, right?
- gumby 5y ago
  Really really good point made.
  - gumby 5y ago
    Really disappointed this was downvoted. Not for the HN Karma (who cares?) but because the GP's comment (from virgil_disgr4ce), calling attention to victim shaming, really is worthwhile.
chmod775 5y ago
It's also a good argument for making full-device encryption without backdoors the default. Even Apple themselves shouldn't be able to access your stuff.
- jaywalk 5y ago
  Well, Apple's devices do have that. As the article mentions, the problem is that they tell you to disable that very protection before sending in your device.
- gumby 5y ago
  This is the situation* — Apple can’t access your data unless you ship them your device unlocked, as the victim did. Not victim shaming: according to the article this is what Apple tells you to do. * cough cellbrite.
  - karmakaze 5y ago
    This might be true on the device, but if it's synced with iCloud the rules[0] are different. > iCloud secures your information by encrypting it when it's in transit, storing it in iCloud in an encrypted format, and using secure tokens for authentication. For certain sensitive information, Apple uses end-to-end encryption. This means that only you can access your information, and only on devices where you’re signed into iCloud. No one else, not even Apple, can access end-to-end encrypted information. > End-to-end encryption requires that you have two-factor authentication turned on for your Apple ID. Keeping your software up-to-date and using two-factor authentication are the most important things that you can do to maintain the security of your devices and data. Then it lists what is end-to-end encrypted when the criteria is met, mail, photos, messages are not listed. [0] https://support.apple.com/en-ca/HT202303 https://support.apple.com/en-ca/HT202303
Grustaf 5y ago
> This another example why nudes and so forth should never make it onto a digital device It definitely isn't an argument for that. It's an argument for cleaning your device before handing it to anybody together with the password. That is the only situation when you're at risk.
mattacular 5y ago
I don't think having or taking nude photos qualifies as a kink in the modern era. Also what this is really another example of is victim blaming.
Aromasin 5y ago
Funny enough Louis Rossman, a person I'm sure many people here look up to with regards to his commitment to fight for right to repair, made a video on this exact subject: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xt3YSD36ZNc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xt3YSD36ZNc I really resonate with his opening point; that somehow there's this belief that the "authorised man can't be a creep". This same logic I see paraded about across a number of other sectors to discredit small businesses and institutions.
- 19870213 5y ago
  Also interesting is that his shop's policy is to ask for a password, so that they can verify everything works afterwards and that prevents people for blaming them for things that were already broken.
smolder 5y ago
We need digital devices that respect their owners first and foremost. That means the actual owners, not the company that sold it or the government they operate under.

fastball 5y ago

Or just keep sensitive things in an encrypted container. Pretty easy to set up an encrypted sparsebundle on a mac for all your naughty photo needs!

wongarsu 5y ago

> If that's your kink, then Polaroid cameras and camcorders exist. That sounds a bit like the Onion sketch "Google allows you to opt-out of tracking by moving to remote mountain village" [1]. This case proves that the criminal justice system works to protect your personal images, we just need a better way to be notified when it happens (the kind of action you would expect Apple to take if they cared, instead of "we continued to strengthen our vendor protocols") 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMChO0qNbkY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMChO0qNbkY

khuey 5y ago
The story doesn't mention anything about any criminal charges. The only reason they got caught is because they uploaded the pictures/videos to her Facebook. If they had sent them to a porn site instead they would have gotten away with it. The grandparent is largely correct, if sexually explicit photos/videos of you make it onto a digital device controlling their distribution is difficult at best.

emsy 5y ago

This should be the top voted commen. This is similar to their claims about App Store security, on which they continuously fail to deliver. They want absolute control but don't give you absolute security and they are only ever liable if you take them to court personally (and who wants to take the worlds biggest company to court really?).

throwaway0a5e 5y ago
Lawyers, accountants, auto mechanics, plumbers, pretty much all every professional that gets access to people's private documents or spaces draws the line for professional discretion in the vicinity of "unless it's child abuse or you're plotting an obvious terrorist attack I didn't see anything" Why the does tech get a low bar?
HatchedLake721 5y ago
Absolute security never existed, doesn't exist today and will never exist in the future.
- hexis 5y ago
  Then Apple should stop trying to sell it.
  - HatchedLake721 5y ago
    And where exactly does Apple sell it?
    - emsy 5y ago
      Did you hear about the epic trial?
  - tantalor 5y ago
    I think you are confusing privacy and security. Apple does tout absolute privacy: https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/07/04/apples-iphone-privacy-ad-campaign-continues-with-new-billboards https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/07/04/apples-iphone-pri...

RegnisGnaw 5y ago

Breaking news, nothing is 100%.

teekert 5y ago
Well, I bet they won't bring out the Cellebrite stuff when you refuse to unlock your phone.
- wizzwizz4 5y ago
  Cellebrite only works if you've unlocked it, anyway.

teekert 5y ago

The thing should be fixable without access to personal data, right? How hard can it be.

XorNot 5y ago

> This another example why nudes and so forth should never make it onto a digital device. If that's your kink, then Polaroid cameras and camcorders exist. This might be the only surefire way now, but it's not how it should be. How it should be is that a HIIPA-like wrath of god may descend on you if it turns out you mishandle someone's data like this.

jedimastert 5y ago
Aside from this, this could be applied to US Code 1801, "video voyeurism", which seems to apply to "capture...or "broadcast"" and/or "revenge porn" law. Can be charged as a felony and can land you on the sex offender registry.
viciousvoxel 5y ago
I want to agree with you, but with caveats; HIPAA systems need to be certified to be secure to a certain degree and are specifically meant to handle sensitive PII data. While Apple could eat the cost of accreditation, it would be a significant burden to require your average IT/PC repair shop to do so. It would also mean opening yourself up to significant liability every time you work on someone's computer, so there would probably have to be some kind of malpractice insurance. I think there's probably a middle ground in there somewhere, but I don't know what it is.
- sircastor 5y ago
  I briefly thought how much additional complexity and process the rest of the software industry would have to go through, to accomplish HIPPA-like compliance, and then I thought how great it would be if everything were like that.
gadders 5y ago
I had a friend of a friend that, in the old days where you used to have to get your photo films developed at a shop, used to keep a copy of anything featuring nudity. I think he had a stack about 2" thick.

hanniabu 5y ago

One more reason for users to have the right to repair

dahart 5y ago

> This is another example why nudes and so forth should never make it onto a digital device. This is true, but focusing on nudes is somewhat missing the real point (and could be interpreted as victim blaming): this story is another example why your email and bank information should never make it on to a digital device. If pictures aren’t safe, then no information is safe. We all have chosen to put information on our devices that is not safe to publish.

zamalek 5y ago
> could be interpreted as victim blaming Just to be clear: definitely not my intention. The victim is not in any way at fault here, this story is yet another warning to the rest of us. > then no information is safe This is definitely true. When I was still on Facebook, I intentionally changed my profile to public (because it ultimately is), and only shared information I was comfortable with the world knowing. Now that you've made this point, off the top of my head, I have realized that my digital footprint has grown more innocuous (apart from taxes and BS like that).
thaumasiotes 5y ago
> focusing on nudes is somewhat missing the real point (and could be interpreted as victim blaming): this story is another example why your email and bank information should never make it on to a digital device Assuming that focusing on nudes is victim blaming: how is focusing on email less problematic than that?

virgil_disgr4ce 5y ago

> This another example why nudes and so forth should never make it onto a digital device Wow, really? Better make sure you don't dress 'provocatively' while you're at it otherwise you were asking for it, right?

gumby 5y ago
Really really good point made.
- gumby 5y ago
  Really disappointed this was downvoted. Not for the HN Karma (who cares?) but because the GP's comment (from virgil_disgr4ce), calling attention to victim shaming, really is worthwhile.

chmod775 5y ago

It's also a good argument for making full-device encryption without backdoors the default. Even Apple themselves shouldn't be able to access your stuff.

jaywalk 5y ago
Well, Apple's devices do have that. As the article mentions, the problem is that they tell you to disable that very protection before sending in your device.
gumby 5y ago
This is the situation* — Apple can’t access your data unless you ship them your device unlocked, as the victim did. Not victim shaming: according to the article this is what Apple tells you to do. * cough cellbrite.
- karmakaze 5y ago
  This might be true on the device, but if it's synced with iCloud the rules[0] are different. > iCloud secures your information by encrypting it when it's in transit, storing it in iCloud in an encrypted format, and using secure tokens for authentication. For certain sensitive information, Apple uses end-to-end encryption. This means that only you can access your information, and only on devices where you’re signed into iCloud. No one else, not even Apple, can access end-to-end encrypted information. > End-to-end encryption requires that you have two-factor authentication turned on for your Apple ID. Keeping your software up-to-date and using two-factor authentication are the most important things that you can do to maintain the security of your devices and data. Then it lists what is end-to-end encrypted when the criteria is met, mail, photos, messages are not listed. [0] https://support.apple.com/en-ca/HT202303 https://support.apple.com/en-ca/HT202303

Grustaf 5y ago

> This another example why nudes and so forth should never make it onto a digital device It definitely isn't an argument for that. It's an argument for cleaning your device before handing it to anybody together with the password. That is the only situation when you're at risk.

mattacular 5y ago

I don't think having or taking nude photos qualifies as a kink in the modern era. Also what this is really another example of is victim blaming.

Aromasin 5y ago

Funny enough Louis Rossman, a person I'm sure many people here look up to with regards to his commitment to fight for right to repair, made a video on this exact subject: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xt3YSD36ZNc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xt3YSD36ZNc I really resonate with his opening point; that somehow there's this belief that the "authorised man can't be a creep". This same logic I see paraded about across a number of other sectors to discredit small businesses and institutions.

19870213 5y ago
Also interesting is that his shop's policy is to ask for a password, so that they can verify everything works afterwards and that prevents people for blaming them for things that were already broken.

smolder 5y ago

We need digital devices that respect their owners first and foremost. That means the actual owners, not the company that sold it or the government they operate under.