8 ms·
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
by 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 agoThis 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?
- phpisthebest 4y ago
- pb7 4y agoYou are at liberty to buy other products and leave these to those who are happy about the security considerations.
- stale2002 4y agoHey, if Apple doesn't want to follow the new Right to Repair laws, then it can shutdown the company or move to a different country. They have an obligation to follow the law as much as any other company.
- sennight 4y agoYou know, I bet somebody responded very similarly to a complaint about the first game studio to put loot boxes in their games. Now we are plagued by them. "Don't like it? Well just make your own ____!" is another classic.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- eropple 4y agoIf you play AAA games or mobile games, sure, you're plagued by them. I don't play either. The games I do play don't have much in the way of that sort of thing at all. And I think they're more fun games besides.
- sennight 4y agoI don't understand your point, which effectively seems to be "not all games!" This is actually a zero sum scenario, games that are pay-to-win would have been something else had the concept not been popularized. Even games that are completely structured around these gambling mechanics... no, they wouldn't necessarily be different games in an alternate reality - they'd just be a different use of the dev's time. So maybe a birdhouse. Also, if this was a derail attempt - well done, I'm now thinking about carpentry instead of how much I dislike Apple.
- eropple 4y ago> I don't understand your point, which effectively seems to be "not all games!" It's more "capitalism dot txt is a thing, yes, but you're opting in." Which you can totally do. I am saying that this is a venue where you don't have to.
- pb7 4y agoWeird, I have never played a game with lootboxes nor have I had to even think about avoiding it. Only supports my point that your fear of it affecting you is unfounded in reality. Except I didn't say make your own, I said pick from the variety of competitors. Who are you to dictate what a third party does, especially when that third party's decisions are well liked by their customers? I don't want the "freedom" to put in cheap aftermarket parts in my high end device, I want it to work extremely well and it does.
- 4y ago
- shuntress 4y agoSort of. For now. How much higher do the walls need to become before it's no longer reasonable to live outside Apple's garden?
- joshmanders 4y ago> How much higher do the walls need to become before it's no longer reasonable to live outside Apple's garden? Do you mean "How much longer do I have to watch people enjoy their cake before I give in and want to eat the cake too?" I find it pretty absurd that people demand Apple do things differently because their choice of alternative feels the need to follow Apple instead of leading themselves.
- pb7 4y agoSlippery slope fallacy. Wake me up when it actually happens because it never does.
- heavyset_go 4y agoThis is the fallacy fallacy. Just because you can identify a potential logical fallacy in a statement doesn't mean it isn't true.
- shuntress 4y agoIt's not a slippery slope. It's just the natural progression of a monopoly.
- phpisthebest 4y agoDont worry I do, the problem is all the other companies play "Follow the Apple" The solution is never just "dont by apple if you do not like it" the solution is highlighting why it is bad, and getting people to pressure companies like Apple to change. Right to Repair is movement, and it is winning. Part of right to repair includes resistance to parts serialization, and/or ensuring that approving new parts that are serialized is free and open to all end users not locked down to only "Authorized repair"
- sennight 4y ago[flagged]
- pb7 4y ago>the problem is all the other companies play "Follow the Apple" Then blame the companies you buy from. You are not an Apple customer so they don't owe you anything. Frankly I'm tired of people that don't even buy the products constantly trying to dictate what those products should be.
- heavyset_go 4y agoYou don't have to be an Apple customer to be affected by Apple's anticompetitive business practices. Apple's actions affect the whole market and all consumers in that market, that's the point behind antitrust law and litigation.
- ScoobleDoodle 4y agoI do like both security and freedom. How do we get both in this scenario? Have the iOS device ask the user for permission to allow unverified hardware to work? Also have a periodic reminder that unverified hardware is installed and the possible consequences?
- mqus 4y agoyeah, let the logged-in user re-pair (pun not entirely intended) their swapped-out components and log it somewhere for future technicians. Apple can also go an extra step to register stolen components to also show that once it is inserted into another devices. ofc there then needs to be some core to pair with but apple will figure it out.
- smoldesu 4y ago> Have the iOS device ask the user for permission to allow unverified hardware to work? Why is 'asking the user' out of the question? If Apple detects a non-OEM component, then give me a modal when I power the device on asking me if I want to enable it. I certainly don't trust Apple to make that decision for me, everything they've done in the past suggests that they're primarily motivated by increasing profit margins.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- ElCheapo 4y agoI don't see how bringing up a right wing conspiracy meme adds anything to what your parent said. Your biometrics should be processed and gathered by the most secure parts of the device, which means going through more hoops to get a replacement.
- phpisthebest 4y agoIt is neither right wing nor a conspiracy, the fact that you believe both of those things seems to be commentary on your sources of news content more than anything >Your biometrics should be processed and gathered by the most secure parts of the device, which means going through more hoops to get a replacement. The problem here is not just limited to biometrics but even if it where many many many many people have posted long commentary on how it could be implemented in a way that is friendly to right to repair, nothing about security is in compatible with repair. NOTHING
- sennight 4y ago> Can you imagine the articles if you could swap out faceID systems to unlock an encrypted iphone? Yes, the articles would go something like this: "WTF is wrong with Apple, did they intentionally implement 'security' in the worst possible way, by leaving the phone unencrypted and just using faceID as a lock screen?!" That is what they'd have to do for your statement to make any sense, they'd have to leave the data unencrypted and just use a removable component as a pass or fail doorman. So the system would have always been unsecure, it would just be more obvious in this scenario.
- candiddevmike 4y agoAFAIK face ID generates a key used to decrypt the data. Swapping the system wouldn't let you unlock it, unless it was performing a MitM against the user of the phone. Honestly most of the TPM and trusted enclave stuff Apple does is mostly to prevent that kind of MitM situation. For most users, I don't see it as a threat to worry about.
- neilalexander 4y agoIt’s even more impressive than that — the infrared dot pattern of every Face ID sensor is also physically unique. You can’t swap out Face ID sensors and keep the same enrolment data as a result because the replacement sensor will produce a slightly different pattern. [1] https://www.apple.com/business-docs/FaceID_Security_Guide.pdf https://www.apple.com/business-docs/FaceID_Security_Guide.pd...
- jorvi 4y agoI mean.. they could just show a pop-up after required passcode unlock: ‘your iPhone recently had its FaceID/brightness/battery/whatever swapped - do you wish to fully enable the replacement part for this iPhone?’
- dylan604 4y agobecause the $badGuy doing the swap could just okay that request
- tjoff 4y agoIf you give your phone to an adversary with large amounts of resources it is game over. If you have to worry about that I most certainly would hope that you wouldn't leave your phone to a repair-shop.
- sosull 4y agoIt’s a very fair point, but stranger things have happened. Case in point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter_Biden_laptop_controversy?wprov=sfti1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter_Biden_laptop_controvers...
- Spivak 4y agoEveryone keeps parroting this like it's 1995 but infinite resources doesn't really help you. In the US FBI case they happened to chain a few now patched exploits in the lightning port that did nothing except allow them the ability to brute force the password. Had the password been strong it would have been game over. Regular, run of the mill encryption you can download at every corner store can withstand attacks from nation states.
- mechanical_bear 4y agoOr leave your MacBook at a repair shop with texts and emails to various VIPs, etc on it… oh wait.
- lofaszvanitt 4y agoDo you actually believe that nation states with shitton level funding can't waltz in and out of an original iPhone?
- jonny_eh 4y agoMaybe? But shouldn't we (and Apple) at least try to make things more secure?
- baybal2 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. Reflashing serial numbers of common i2c chips is routine, and not "harder." It basically only deters self-taught repair shop owners, without electronics background.
- _V_ 4y agoHow does disabling TrueTone/autobrightness help your security? Or vibration motor? Or battery? Or rear facing camera? I can answer for you: these are completely unrelated to security. It is just a middle finger from Apple to anyone wanting to repair their device. edit: typo