Apple vs. the Right To Repair (bloombergview.com)

retroworks writes: Bloomberg columnist Adam Minter takes on Apple's "Error 53 Code" and the precedents being challenged by the Right To Repair movement. Apple claims that bricking the phone if it's repaired by a non-Apple certified repair shop protects you from tampering with, say, the fingerprint scanner. But the column documents how the number of "certified" repair shops is under attack. If you can't open it, do you really own it?

Comments

It really is about security, not repair

[Anonymous Coward]

But then again, anyone could have told you that including biometric security on a smartphone was just inviting this kind of hardware signing.

Where outside of China are you going to find the components and the equipment to repair any of these electronics, anyway? Everything's microsoldered to a circuit board the size of a credit card, and the tiniest slip of your all-too-human hands and you've ruined a trace on a different circuit.

Re:It really is about security, not repair

[mrex]

If you could replace the touch ID sensor with any old thing, then they'd publish about "SECURITY FLAWS IN TOUCH ID ARCHITECTURE DISCOVERED" instead.

Re:It really is about security, not repair

[mrchaotica]

It shouldn't even matter! The CPU should be doing the authentication anyway, with the sensor simply sending the bitmap (or whatever) to it. Having the sensor be a "trusted" part of the authentication system is just as stupid as requiring a "trusted" keyboard for putting in passwords would be.*

(* Yeah, yeah, keyloggers -- but don't even try arguing that angle, because anybody who cared about that wouldn't have chosen to have their phone repaired with un-vetted parts in the first place.)

Re:It really is about security, not repair

[sjames]

OTOH, instead of locking up the whole phone, they could just have it refuse to accept the fingerprint ID and let you continue to use other authentication methods.

Re:It really is about security, not repair

[Maritz]

Plus as I understand it, PIN entry is required for setting up TouchID, which strongly suggests that falling back to PIN when TouchID has a problem would be completely reasonable. Apple obviously disagree and instead prefer to brick the phone, whether that is a commendable position in terms of security or a cynical way of selling another phone depends on what you think about Apple I suppose. Personally I'd say it's overzealous...

Re:It really is about security, not repair

[MrKrillls]

Exactly. Disable the fingerprint reader and demand a PIN.

Bricking the phone is evil. Driving people to factory authorized repair doesn't cut it for me. Especially if that involves bricking phones. People are too dependent upon phones for apple to take it upon themselves to decide it is best to brick someone's phone on scant evidence of actual malfeasance. It is wrong. It is wrong minded. It is thoughtless. And it is selfish on apple's part.

Re: It really is about security, not repair

[hidden]

Disabling touch ID on a phone with a non- genuine sensor would be fine. People would just have to use their PIN instead. But that's not what apple has chosen to do. Instead they've chosen to entirely nuke the device, with no warning. That's not a reasonable behaviour for a consumer security measure.

Re:It really is about security, not repair

[Gr8Apes]

That is a well written response. The real answer is "if you want to use your touch ID and it needs repair, it must be repaired by an Apple approved shop". Otherwise, turn off Touch ID and work without it. The OS gives you no other options.

Considering that Touch ID does more than merely let you in your phone (Apple Pay) this stance seems 100% reasonable. Apple might have a warning on the phone or a prominent agreement that if you enable TouchID/ApplePay, you understand that turning on TouchID can only be done with Apple certified TouchID parts, and no unapproved 3rd party repairs can have been done. (They may already have this, I don't recall reading it personally)

Re:It really is about security, not repair

[Anonymous Coward]

But since it doesn't throw the error when the repair is done but months later when an update is applied kinda makes all of this pointless. I could swap the sensor and access all the data I want the way it works now if I was trying to do so and this "security" measure would not stop me since it doesn't kick in at the time of the swap out. The way it stands now its really only enforcing "apple only" repairs and not any form of security.

Re:It really is about security, not repair

[spire3661]

And as we see, it may be useful for security, but it ruins usability (via making repairs harder than they have to be). Apple has no excuse here. They HAVE to allow 3rd party parts, just like the automakers had to eventually be forced to.,

Re:It really is about security, not repair

[BronsCon]

Yup, because a sensor that is disabled (power and data pins) when it fails to authenticate itself can totally prod at the rest of the system.

And if Apple's engineering is that weak, they deserve the criticism. If the secure enclave is truly write-only as Apple claims, if communication between the fingerprint reader and the secure enclave is encrypted as Apple claims, if a rolling secondary key is used as Apple claims, if the match decision is made within the secure enclave (as would be necessary if it is write-only)... see where I'm going with this?

Re:It really is about security, not repair

[spire3661]

Usability includes the sum total of the life of the device, including 3rd party repairs. Security is always a compromise between usability and integrity. Apple fell too far on the security side and hampered usability. For the record, i read your comment on my ipad, the only axe i have to grind is making sure we maintain a 'right to repair', which includes 3rd party parts.

If you can't open it, do you really own it?

[bulled]

No, but this is the trade off people make when buying devices like the iphone/ipod. Clearly people value having the fashionable/trendy/"Just Works*" that Apple provide over being able to fix something that is broken. Until that trade off tilts harder against the consumer it will continue to be made.

* - For some values of "Just Works"

Popup

[bondsbw]

"Would you like to use this new fingerprint scanner? [Yes] [No]"

Yes -> "Please enter your password."

See that wasn't so hard.

Property

[Anonymous Coward]

Property for peasants is so last century.
Welcome to the 21st century, where property is only for corporations, copyright is eternal and everything is under license.

Your government is untrusted with your data.

[tlambert]

Your government is untrusted with your data.

But escaping that is "fashionably trendy".

Got it.

I hate Apple but they're right

[technomom]

Think of it this way. Do you own your Visa card and your tamper-proof Driver's license? Sure, but if you screw around with the chip in either of them, then you shouldn't expect that they'll work anymore. Older New York State driver's licenses turn black when you try to peel off the laminate.

So you can own stuff but if they have security built in for identification or monetary protection, I think it is reasonable for it to be rendered useless if tampered with.

Re:Of course not

[stealth_finger]

If you can't open it, do you really own it?

Mere common sense tells us that that the answer is NO. If a person sells you a product, yet retains the right to forcibly dictate how you use that product, then you haven't bought anything at all, but rather leased it.

Especially if they reserve the right to brick it irrecoverably because you had the gall to try and get repaired by someone other than them.

No, it's really about vendor lockin

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it's 100% about vendor lock in. Stop shilling.

Re:If I can't fix the FPU in my Pentium III...

[drinkypoo]

Are there any tamper-proofing features in the P3 that would prevent you from doing this? Or is your inability simply due to your not having the right tools, not that anyone does?

Apple's planned obsolescence profit strategy

[JoeyRox]

Think of it as a three-legged stool. The first leg is to mete out feature and function improvements so that each new model has just enough goodness to entice an upgrade. The second leg is to release iOS updates that run so slowly on existing models that users are forced to upgrade just to restore the relative performance they used to get on their current phones. The third leg is to charge exorbitant prices for authorized repairs while making it impossible for third-parties to provide affordable repair services.

This strategy is designed to gently encourage and then forcibly coerce users to keep upgrading their phones.

Separate issues

[sjbe]

Where outside of China are you going to find the components and the equipment to repair any of these electronics, anyway?

Umm, you can buy things from China. If you need proof of this please visit your local Walmart.

Everything's microsoldered to a circuit board the size of a credit card, and the tiniest slip of your all-too-human hands and you've ruined a trace on a different circuit.

The practicality of actually doing a repair or modification is not relevant to whether or not one should have the right to attempt the repair or modification. Those are separate issues.

Re:stop buying overpriced overhyped apple trash

[Archangel Michael]

I've known plenty of people who have had both, switched, and switched back. Both ways.

People want what they want, and there is a choice. Apple or Android are both perfectly fine as consumer choices for everyday people. Some people prefer (gasp!) Apple, others prefer (gasp!) Android even after trying the other. I know, really hard to understand how anyone can like either, considering how awesome Windows Phone (or whatever it is called today) is!

IMHO the biggest limitation to what a phone can do, is the user using it.

Lies

[dkman]

If they wanted what they claim they wanted then they could simply show a warning that "certified parts were detected" or a "tamper detected" every time the phone boots, or more annoyingly every time it wakes.
What they really want is for you to come suck from their teat any time you need help with their device so they can enjoy the cash flow and laugh all the way to the bank with their 18 billion in profits.

Fixed a mistake in the article

[Khashishi]

How can I avoid Error 53?
Don't buy Apple