Apple bricking iPhones that have been 3rd party repaired

[hornetrider]

otolith said:

hornetrider said:

otolith said:

Not really their problem, is it, since they won't be in possession of an iPhone with a botched repair to the security system.

Steve. Do tell us how a replacement touch sensor is a botched repair. Show working.

New sensor paired correctly with secure enclave = job done properly
New sensor not paired because repairer is ignorant of the need to do so = botched.

Not quite Steve, not quite.

It only became a problem when Apple retrospectively added a security feature in a new software version without warning anyone. And decided the correct course of action was to brick the phone when users upgraded.

[otolith]

Tycho said:

otolith said:

hornetrider said:

otolith said:

Not really their problem, is it, since they won't be in possession of an iPhone with a botched repair to the security system.

Steve. Do tell us how a replacement touch sensor is a botched repair. Show working.

New sensor paired correctly with secure enclave = job done properly
New sensor not paired because repairer is ignorant of the need to do so = botched.

That is fine but only erase the secure enclave and disable the fingerprint part of the security structure. It can be done because you don't need to use a fingerprint to use the phone, people use a PIN all the time.

The need to pair the touch id isn't being disputed by anyone on this thread as far as I can see but it is the totally incompetent way that the whole phone is reduced to a brick which is out of order and I'm still surprised that some people cannot see this.

Whether bricking the phone is the correct response to a perceived attempt to compromise it is a different question to whether the repair has been botched. If you don't even consider the possibility that the state of the hardware is the result of incompetence rather than malice, it makes perfect sense to wipe the device. Really comes down to whether Apple should have foreseen that this could happen and prioritised preventing unwanted loss of data over risk of theft. As someone pointed out, it's possible that they've had their arm twisted by the card companies.

[davek_964]

otolith said:

Koofler said:

You say "unimportant gadget" but your earlier posts wax lyrical about the iPhone being a premium (more expensive than Android et al) handset, like that actually means something.

I think you misunderstood, I said that the advantage of Android is cheapness. Do you dispute that you can get Android devices more cheaply than iOS devices, and that this is an advantage?

You are intentionally misquoting yourself. You said :

otolith said:

The only real advantage of Android for most ordinary users is cheapness.

That is very different from

otolith said:

Do you dispute that you can get Android devices more cheaply than iOS devices, and that this is an advantage?

I am an ordinary user - and I could buy an iphone tomorrow without needing to worry about the cost. For me, there are many advantages of the phone I have, because it does what I want better than an iphone would. Hence, as I've said - I would choose my phone over iphone even if they were the same cost or the iphone was cheaper, and I obviously wouldn't pay more for a phone which does less (for me).

[hornetrider]

otolith said:

it makes perfect sense to wipe the device

Do you understand the difference between the terms 'wipe' and 'brick'?

[otolith]

hornetrider said:

otolith said:

hornetrider said:

otolith said:

Not really their problem, is it, since they won't be in possession of an iPhone with a botched repair to the security system.

Steve. Do tell us how a replacement touch sensor is a botched repair. Show working.

New sensor paired correctly with secure enclave = job done properly
New sensor not paired because repairer is ignorant of the need to do so = botched.

Not quite Steve, not quite.

It only became a problem when Apple retrospectively added a security feature in a new software version without warning anyone. And decided the correct course of action was to brick the phone when users upgraded.

The botched repair was not noticed until the update, but it was always botched. The pairing was always there, and should have been maintained. You can't go incompetently buggering about with hardware and not expect problems with manufacturer firmware updates. If you modify your car and then get a main dealer PCM reflash that breaks it, whose fault is that?

[otolith]

hornetrider said:

otolith said:

it makes perfect sense to wipe the device

Do you understand the difference between the terms 'wipe' and 'brick'?

Do you think that Apple's engineers should have been more careful to ensure that phones they believed to be stolen remained usable?

[hornetrider]

Keep suppin' the Kool Aid bro

[bad company]

otolith said:

If you modify your car and then get a main dealer PCM reflash that breaks it, whose fault is that?

The dealers if they broke it intentionally.

[otolith]

davek_964 said:

I am an ordinary user - and I could buy an iphone tomorrow without needing to worry about the cost. For me, there are many advantages of the phone I have, because it does what I want better than an iphone would. Hence, as I've said - I would choose my phone over iphone even if they were the same cost or the iphone was cheaper, and I obviously wouldn't pay more for a phone which does less (for me).

I would say an ordinary user makes calls, sends texts, takes photographs, browses the web, uses email. Stuff that every smartphone on the market does, irrespective of OS or manufacturer. They also install applications, most of which don't do anything particularly OS specific. What have you got in mind that Android does and iOS doesn't, that ordinary users need?

[Koofler]

otolith said:

hornetrider said:

otolith said:

it makes perfect sense to wipe the device

Do you understand the difference between the terms 'wipe' and 'brick'?

Do you think that Apple's engineers should have been more careful to ensure that phones they believed to be stolen remained usable?

No, they shouldn't have bricked the vast majority that weren't. It's looking ever increasingly like this action is illegal.

FWIW re the earlier points you and I were crossing - I've worked in IT for years and couldn't tell you the last time I purchased (out of my own pocket) a laptop/phone/tablet etc so I they all have zero financial or emotional value. To me it's like comparing diesel with petrol. Petrol is better for some things, diesel for others. I don't feel the need to rabidly defend one over the other.

But replacing the headphone socket with something else is purely an exercise in re-inventing the wheel.

otolith said:

davek_964 said:

I am an ordinary user - and I could buy an iphone tomorrow without needing to worry about the cost. For me, there are many advantages of the phone I have, because it does what I want better than an iphone would. Hence, as I've said - I would choose my phone over iphone even if they were the same cost or the iphone was cheaper, and I obviously wouldn't pay more for a phone which does less (for me).

I would say an ordinary user makes calls, sends texts, takes photographs, browses the web, uses email. Stuff that every smartphone on the market does, irrespective of OS or manufacturer. They also install applications, most of which don't do anything particularly OS specific. What have you got in mind that Android does and iOS doesn't, that ordinary users need?

It doesn't have the Ghost of Steve Jobs telling you what you can and can't do or install. I used to have a radio app on my iPad that came on as an alarm clock so I got to wake up to the dulcet tones of Nick Ferrari. The app was eventually shelved when his holiness decided that apps shouldn't be able to launch themselves, even if the user explicitly wanted them to. QED.

Edited by Koofler on Thursday 11th February 16:24

Edited by Koofler on Thursday 11th February 16:24

[davek_964]

otolith said:

I would say an ordinary user makes calls, sends texts, takes photographs, browses the web, uses email. Stuff that every smartphone on the market does, irrespective of OS or manufacturer. They also install applications, most of which don't do anything particularly OS specific. What have you got in mind that Android does and iOS doesn't, that ordinary users need?

"Ordinary" users covers a very wide range. For some of us, SD card is a must have, widgets are useful etc.

To take the lowest denominator of features and assume it covers the majority of phone users is a tad simplistic. Not to mention the fact that if that's all people need, doesn't that mean your own argument is that "ordinary users" would have to be stupid to pay more for an Iphone when a cheaper phone does all that anyway?

Anyway - life is too short for this. Your arguments are inconsistent and a tad ridiculous. Enjoy your iphone, I'm off to do something a bit more productive.

[ZesPak]

otolith said:

I would say an ordinary user makes calls, sends texts, takes photographs, browses the web, uses email. Stuff that every smartphone on the market does, irrespective of OS or manufacturer. They also install applications, most of which don't do anything particularly OS specific. What have you got in mind that Android does and iOS doesn't, that ordinary users need?

I would say that an ordinary user in that case indeed wouldn't notice the difference between the iPhone 6S and the Moto G.

Which says a lot, really. Can we turn this around? Why would an ordinary user buy an iPhone?

[WinstonWolf]

ZesPak said:

otolith said:

I would say an ordinary user makes calls, sends texts, takes photographs, browses the web, uses email. Stuff that every smartphone on the market does, irrespective of OS or manufacturer. They also install applications, most of which don't do anything particularly OS specific. What have you got in mind that Android does and iOS doesn't, that ordinary users need?

I would say that an ordinary user in that case indeed wouldn't notice the difference between the iPhone 6S and the Moto G.

Which says a lot, really. Can we turn this around? Why would an ordinary user buy an iPhone?

I have both, there's quite a difference

[KaraK]

otolith said:

Do you think that Apple's engineers should have been more careful to ensure that phones they believed to be stolen remained usable?

Except it would take a very, very naive phone engineer to not realise that there would be large numbers of phones with improperly paired sensors that were not stolen. Can anyone provide any reports of iPhones being stolen and then having the TouchID sensor swapped to compromise the secure enclave? In general terms fixing a security vulnerability is a good thing, even more so where it can be done before it has been widely exploited if at all but any change to a system that's already out in production needs to have it's impacts properly considered before it's released - assuming that any improperly paired TouchID sensor was an attempt to compromise the system and therefore locking down the device completely is not in of itself a stupid one but when you know that there is a not insignificant number of devices out there with the "botched" pairing that are neither stolen, nor suffering an attempted compromise? Yeah that's pretty stupid.

Implementing the fix might not have been something they had much choice in - after all the card schemes have an interest here and as I (and others) have said previously they may have brought pressure to bear, but that doesn't excuse handling the situation in such a cack-handed way.

[otolith]

Koofler said:

otolith said:

hornetrider said:

otolith said:

it makes perfect sense to wipe the device

Do you understand the difference between the terms 'wipe' and 'brick'?

Do you think that Apple's engineers should have been more careful to ensure that phones they believed to be stolen remained usable?

No, they shouldn't have bricked the vast majority that weren't. It's looking ever increasingly like this action is illegal.

The context of that conversation was whether the behaviour was reasonable if we assume that the engineers had not considered the possibility that phones would be in that state without malicious intent. I think they have simply failed to anticipate that this could happen. It seems to me that they should have ensured in the last version of the OS that an unpaired phone stopped working pretty rapidly.

Koofler said:

But replacing the headphone socket with something else is purely an exercise in re-inventing the wheel.

Presumably they have a reason, given that it clearly upsets some people and will cost them some sales. It will be interesting to see what, if anything, they gain by doing it.

Koofler said:

It doesn't have the Ghost of Steve Jobs telling you what you can and can't do or install. I used to have a radio app on my iPad that came on as an alarm clock so I got to wake up to the dulcet tones of Nick Ferrari. The app was eventually shelved when his holiness decided that apps shouldn't be able to launch themselves, even if the user explicitly wanted them to. QED.

And that's understandable, but it's not a unanimous position. For instance, whether being able to use third party app stores is a useful freedom or an unnecessary risk is a point of view.

[jmorgan]

otolith said:

Koofler said:

But replacing the headphone socket with something else is purely an exercise in re-inventing the wheel.

Presumably they have a reason, given that it clearly upsets some people and will cost them some sales. It will be interesting to see what, if anything, they gain by doing it.

Thinner phones apparently.

[otolith]

ZesPak said:

otolith said:

I would say an ordinary user makes calls, sends texts, takes photographs, browses the web, uses email. Stuff that every smartphone on the market does, irrespective of OS or manufacturer. They also install applications, most of which don't do anything particularly OS specific. What have you got in mind that Android does and iOS doesn't, that ordinary users need?

I would say that an ordinary user in that case indeed wouldn't notice the difference between the iPhone 6S and the Moto G.

Which says a lot, really. Can we turn this around? Why would an ordinary user buy an iPhone?

It's a fair point. And a lot of ordinary users do buy something else. I think if push came to shove the vast majority of people could get by with any of the smartphones on the market. It's not even a first world problem, more of a first world whinge. But then I don't think phones are exciting, and some people do.

[ZesPak]

otolith said:

But then I don't think phones are exciting, and some people do.

Maybe you're using the wrong phone then.

[otolith]

More likely I'm just a bit too old. May be a generational thing.

[George111]

davek_964 said:

George111 said:

Seriously, this thread lost all credibility when: (a) the Fandroid people refused to accept and/or understand the critical nature of the security risk

No.

The security risk is understood. The main direction of this thread is that the Iphone owners who have posted think that bricking the phone is a reasonable way to deal with it, and that anybody who has had a "cheap" repair kind of deserves it - and the non-iphone owners think it's entirely unreasonable and a sledgehammer vs walnut solution.

That's not correct. Everybody has agreed that Apple's communication was poor, or, perhaps terrible, or even dismal. No argument there.

Bricking the iPhone is THE ONLY way to deal with it, what else could they do, pop up a little message saying don't worry, you may or may not be a thief trying to access the bank account of Mr iPhone owner but if you tell us you're not by placing a tick in this box, we'll let you carry on but if we find out later that you are a thief we will have to report you to the plod ?

I think you probably don't understand the issue hence you're not letting go . . .