11 ms·

Odd article considering everything is still software locked to the phone. Sure it's easier to repair, but if you get your parts from anywhere else than apple's

Odd article considering everything is still software locked to the phone. Sure it's easier to repair, but if you get your parts from anywhere else than apple's program directly, a lot of features will stop working. Hugh Jeffreys made a video interchanging parts on two brand new iphone's and it disabled a lot of things including auto-brightness. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2WhU77ihw8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2WhU77ihw8

thepasswordis 4y ago
Ah, so there is a way to disable auto brightness! Are there any aftermarket upgrades which will also permanently disable "live photos"?
- incanus77 4y ago
  Settings > Camera > Preserve Settings > Live Photo
  - lostlogin 4y ago
    OP wants an aftermarket method.
    - kube-system 4y ago
      Ship me the phone and I will click the button for you for only 3 easy payments of $19.95.
  - thepasswordis 4y ago
    Yeah I've done this. It somehow keeps getting turned back on wether it gets grazed by my finger, an update happens and resets the setting, or whatever else. I'm saying i want a way that disables it and then prevents it from ever being re-enabled. Also: it's a joke.
    - pb7 4y ago
      Jokes are supposed to be funny.
- laweijfmvo 4y ago
  The Settings menu
- reaperducer 4y ago
  Not aftermarket, but Apple offers something for both of those. It's called The Manual. You can get one here: https://support.apple.com/manuals/iphone https://support.apple.com/manuals/iphone It's even free!
millzlane 4y ago
This makes it easier for my technicians when customers lie by omission when they have had their device repaired someplace else and they bring it back to us for repair. It's not until we get into the repair and find out someone has stripped screws that can't be removed without extraction tools and replaced LSI's. It's also nice for consumers who get their devices stolen strictly for parts. Preventing someone from basically chop shopping phones. I don't use iphone's but it's a nice feature. If the parts are serialized they could prevent your stolen iphone's camera from working in someone else's stolen iphone. Essentially locking the parts to a iphone that locked by an appleid.
- tjoff 4y ago
  The first part doesn't require functionality to be disabled though.
  - buildbot 4y ago
    Probably a combination of missing calibrations and the software locking. It seems better to fail visibly than to have a device silently phoning home that it is non-genuine.
- Veliladon 4y ago
  The other thing is that Apple is trying to make things harder for people with large amounts of resources (think nation states) to exfiltrate data by using pwned components. Like when you take it into a repair shop, how do you know that the replacement part isn't compromised? If I was replacing the front facing FaceID complex I sure as hell would want verifiable Apple gear and it to be paired to the phone. Why would I want some random person to be able to put something in my phone's biometric authentication path?
  - buildbot 4y ago
    This exactly. To have a more secure device this is one of the trade offs. Can you imagine the articles if you could swap out faceID systems to unlock an encrypted iphone?
devrand 4y ago
This does coincide with Apple changing Applecare+ to cover an unlimited number of incidents. Their motivation was simply to streamline their own internal repairs?
- Someone1234 4y ago
  That "unlimited" thing only impacts a very small number of devices. It is a better headline than reality. Previously you could have two accidental damage incidents PER YEAR, which means four for a standard Applecare+ 24 months plan. How many people, realistically, had over four accidental damage incidents in a two-year period wherein they benefit from this "unlimited" change? As I said, it is good marketing, a very niche change in reality.
  - dkonofalski 4y ago
    I don't even have a case on my phone (and never have on any phone in the past) and have never had an incident. I know at least 5 people that have broken their phones more than 4 times per year and they all use cases. Some people just do not treat their electronics like the expensive devices they are.
    - shuntress 4y ago
      Some people expect their expensive tools to withstand the rigors of daily use.
      - dkonofalski 4y ago
        Dropping devices on concrete is not "daily use". That's like saying that people should expect cars to be unaffected by randomly crashing into walls.
        joshmanders 4y ago
        Not to mention I've dropped mine a LOT. scratched up screen, dings in the sides, everything. (No case/protection at all too) It definitely withstands daily use. Dropping it 4-5 times a day every day however probably slowly chips away at the sturdiness of the device.
buildbot 4y ago
Good! I want to know that even a used and repaired iPhone has genuine parts in it
- rasz 4y ago
  >interchanging parts on two brand new iphone's
  - Bilal_io 4y ago
    Exactly! One important argument for Right to Repair is the environment. If I cannot salvage parts from a dead phone then it'll be e-waste. This doesn't help the consumer nor the environment, but it will definitely affect Apple's pockets in a positive way.
unethical_ban 4y ago
I've been thinking about a future where deepfakes/AI are more everyday (which is soon). I can imagine Apple doing some kind of hardware-level signing of camera and video data, so that any image shot by an iPhone/iPad would have a signature declaring that is was not edited by the user in any way. Details on whether RAW or any kind of auto-cleanup could be included. In other words, a chain-of-custody kind of thing so that images can be asserted as real vs. created by a computer. Depending on how such a system would be implemented, this would require "real Apple hardware" from the ground up.
- shuntress 4y ago
  And "Real Apple Hardware" supporting "Real Apple ID" on every device in the network.
  - samatman 4y ago
    Cryptographic signatures can be decoded by anything which has the public key, that's not how this would work at all.
    - illiac786 4y ago
      Cryptographic signatures are _meant_ to be decoded and verified. If you want to take a signature you need to extract a secret key from an iPhone in this scenario, which would be probably stored in the secure enclave. That's how asymmetric cryptography works.
- reaperducer 4y ago
  I can imagine Apple doing some kind of hardware-level signing of camera and video data, so that any image shot by an iPhone/iPad would have a signature declaring that is was not edited by the user in any way. This exists, and is why the (Canon?) cameras used by police departments at crime scenes are so expensive.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
specialist 4y ago
Applying zero trust (or equiv) to a system's internals is pretty cool.
lukas099 4y ago
I think that what you are saying is valid, but this should still be celebrated as a win for consumers. You don't have to see something as all good or all bad.
agilob 4y ago
Rooting even those easily fixable Android, with unlocked bootloader and coming with Android One still voids the warranty and might break cameras. Unlocking more potential of a software, breaks hardware. Apple is preparing to legislative changes in EU that hardware must be repairable. This law is already a reality in France https://www.ecr-community.org/implementing-the-reparability-index-in-france/ https://www.ecr-community.org/implementing-the-reparability-...
viktorcode 4y ago
> interchanging parts on two brand new iphone's and it disabled a lot of things including auto-brightness. I think one problem is not being discussed enough is iPhones being stolen for parts (since in most cases they can't be reactivated). I strongly suspect inability to simply switch parts without remote authorisation is Apple's way to address the problem.
- smoldesu 4y ago
  Okay, let's discuss it then. Why do I need Apple's consent to repair the device I paid for? Why is there no way for me to (even temporarily) disable this feature if I actually want to fix my phone?
  - cromka 4y ago
    > Why is there no way for me to (even temporarily) disable this feature if I actually want to fix my phone? You want to be able to temporarily disable a feature that Apple introduced to prevent from installing potentially stolen parts in your phone?
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - smoldesu 4y ago
      All parts are 'potentially stolen', that's just a scary thing that John Deere and Apple says to justify their first-party stranglehold on repairs. Louis Rossmann and co. use donor parts for repairs all the time. If they own and can unlock the donor Macbook/iPhone, they should be able to attest that the device is being used for parts/repair and disable the protection. I see no potential for abuse here, and it prevents more iPhones from becoming landfill. Win/win, since Apple cares about the environment so much! If I own my device and can enter the password on it, I should be able to decide which software features are enabled and disabled. That shouldn't be a controversial opinion.
      - saiya-jin 4y ago
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

thepasswordis 4y ago

Ah, so there is a way to disable auto brightness! Are there any aftermarket upgrades which will also permanently disable "live photos"?

incanus77 4y ago
Settings > Camera > Preserve Settings > Live Photo
- lostlogin 4y ago
  OP wants an aftermarket method.
  - kube-system 4y ago
    Ship me the phone and I will click the button for you for only 3 easy payments of $19.95.
- thepasswordis 4y ago
  Yeah I've done this. It somehow keeps getting turned back on wether it gets grazed by my finger, an update happens and resets the setting, or whatever else. I'm saying i want a way that disables it and then prevents it from ever being re-enabled. Also: it's a joke.
  - pb7 4y ago
    Jokes are supposed to be funny.
laweijfmvo 4y ago
The Settings menu
reaperducer 4y ago
Not aftermarket, but Apple offers something for both of those. It's called The Manual. You can get one here: https://support.apple.com/manuals/iphone https://support.apple.com/manuals/iphone It's even free!

millzlane 4y ago

This makes it easier for my technicians when customers lie by omission when they have had their device repaired someplace else and they bring it back to us for repair. It's not until we get into the repair and find out someone has stripped screws that can't be removed without extraction tools and replaced LSI's. It's also nice for consumers who get their devices stolen strictly for parts. Preventing someone from basically chop shopping phones. I don't use iphone's but it's a nice feature. If the parts are serialized they could prevent your stolen iphone's camera from working in someone else's stolen iphone. Essentially locking the parts to a iphone that locked by an appleid.

tjoff 4y ago
The first part doesn't require functionality to be disabled though.
- buildbot 4y ago
  Probably a combination of missing calibrations and the software locking. It seems better to fail visibly than to have a device silently phoning home that it is non-genuine.
Veliladon 4y ago
The other thing is that Apple is trying to make things harder for people with large amounts of resources (think nation states) to exfiltrate data by using pwned components. Like when you take it into a repair shop, how do you know that the replacement part isn't compromised? If I was replacing the front facing FaceID complex I sure as hell would want verifiable Apple gear and it to be paired to the phone. Why would I want some random person to be able to put something in my phone's biometric authentication path?
- buildbot 4y ago
  This exactly. To have a more secure device this is one of the trade offs. Can you imagine the articles if you could swap out faceID systems to unlock an encrypted iphone?

devrand 4y ago

This does coincide with Apple changing Applecare+ to cover an unlimited number of incidents. Their motivation was simply to streamline their own internal repairs?

Someone1234 4y ago
That "unlimited" thing only impacts a very small number of devices. It is a better headline than reality. Previously you could have two accidental damage incidents PER YEAR, which means four for a standard Applecare+ 24 months plan. How many people, realistically, had over four accidental damage incidents in a two-year period wherein they benefit from this "unlimited" change? As I said, it is good marketing, a very niche change in reality.
- dkonofalski 4y ago
  I don't even have a case on my phone (and never have on any phone in the past) and have never had an incident. I know at least 5 people that have broken their phones more than 4 times per year and they all use cases. Some people just do not treat their electronics like the expensive devices they are.
  - shuntress 4y ago
    Some people expect their expensive tools to withstand the rigors of daily use.
    - dkonofalski 4y ago
      Dropping devices on concrete is not "daily use". That's like saying that people should expect cars to be unaffected by randomly crashing into walls.
      - joshmanders 4y ago
        Not to mention I've dropped mine a LOT. scratched up screen, dings in the sides, everything. (No case/protection at all too) It definitely withstands daily use. Dropping it 4-5 times a day every day however probably slowly chips away at the sturdiness of the device.

buildbot 4y ago

Good! I want to know that even a used and repaired iPhone has genuine parts in it

rasz 4y ago
>interchanging parts on two brand new iphone's
- Bilal_io 4y ago
  Exactly! One important argument for Right to Repair is the environment. If I cannot salvage parts from a dead phone then it'll be e-waste. This doesn't help the consumer nor the environment, but it will definitely affect Apple's pockets in a positive way.

unethical_ban 4y ago

I've been thinking about a future where deepfakes/AI are more everyday (which is soon). I can imagine Apple doing some kind of hardware-level signing of camera and video data, so that any image shot by an iPhone/iPad would have a signature declaring that is was not edited by the user in any way. Details on whether RAW or any kind of auto-cleanup could be included. In other words, a chain-of-custody kind of thing so that images can be asserted as real vs. created by a computer. Depending on how such a system would be implemented, this would require "real Apple hardware" from the ground up.

shuntress 4y ago
And "Real Apple Hardware" supporting "Real Apple ID" on every device in the network.
- samatman 4y ago
  Cryptographic signatures can be decoded by anything which has the public key, that's not how this would work at all.
  - illiac786 4y ago
    Cryptographic signatures are _meant_ to be decoded and verified. If you want to take a signature you need to extract a secret key from an iPhone in this scenario, which would be probably stored in the secure enclave. That's how asymmetric cryptography works.
reaperducer 4y ago
I can imagine Apple doing some kind of hardware-level signing of camera and video data, so that any image shot by an iPhone/iPad would have a signature declaring that is was not edited by the user in any way. This exists, and is why the (Canon?) cameras used by police departments at crime scenes are so expensive.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

specialist 4y ago

Applying zero trust (or equiv) to a system's internals is pretty cool.

lukas099 4y ago

I think that what you are saying is valid, but this should still be celebrated as a win for consumers. You don't have to see something as all good or all bad.

agilob 4y ago

Rooting even those easily fixable Android, with unlocked bootloader and coming with Android One still voids the warranty and might break cameras. Unlocking more potential of a software, breaks hardware. Apple is preparing to legislative changes in EU that hardware must be repairable. This law is already a reality in France https://www.ecr-community.org/implementing-the-reparability-index-in-france/ https://www.ecr-community.org/implementing-the-reparability-...

viktorcode 4y ago

> interchanging parts on two brand new iphone's and it disabled a lot of things including auto-brightness. I think one problem is not being discussed enough is iPhones being stolen for parts (since in most cases they can't be reactivated). I strongly suspect inability to simply switch parts without remote authorisation is Apple's way to address the problem.

smoldesu 4y ago
Okay, let's discuss it then. Why do I need Apple's consent to repair the device I paid for? Why is there no way for me to (even temporarily) disable this feature if I actually want to fix my phone?
- cromka 4y ago
  > Why is there no way for me to (even temporarily) disable this feature if I actually want to fix my phone? You want to be able to temporarily disable a feature that Apple introduced to prevent from installing potentially stolen parts in your phone?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - smoldesu 4y ago
    All parts are 'potentially stolen', that's just a scary thing that John Deere and Apple says to justify their first-party stranglehold on repairs. Louis Rossmann and co. use donor parts for repairs all the time. If they own and can unlock the donor Macbook/iPhone, they should be able to attest that the device is being used for parts/repair and disable the protection. I see no potential for abuse here, and it prevents more iPhones from becoming landfill. Win/win, since Apple cares about the environment so much! If I own my device and can enter the password on it, I should be able to decide which software features are enabled and disabled. That shouldn't be a controversial opinion.
    - saiya-jin 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]