• Wintex@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    169
    ·
    1 year ago

    Good job ifixit! This should be a cause for outrage. Pretending to support the right to repair while also softwarelocking repairs is not just two faced, but actively harming the consumers.

  • selokichtli@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    84
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Place Pikachu surprised face meme here for me, please. Apple simps, unite.

    EDIT: They always do.

    • sadreality@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      Most Apple SIMPs don’t care it seems they got nothing to hide and they are deff not poor to be worried about shit like this. Just buy a new one ;)

      • johnthedoe@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        While I personally wouldn’t repair my own iPhone. If I need it done I would want to go to an Apple Store anyway. This makes selling on your phone for other people to fix and use and sell on and use again virtually impossible, which would’ve been more sustainable than just binning the phone.

        It’s especially shitty since they also announced net zero plans. It’s all smoke and mirrors.

        • sadreality@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          SIMPs don’t think big picture but you do make a very valid point…

          Second hand market benefits everyone except Tim apple

    • Don Escobar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      You know, as both an Apple fanboy and a repair advocate I was disgusted by their over affirmation of being carbon neutral like it’s a badge to be proud of when people KNOW they are just not friendly to repairing your shit easily.

      I’m heavily locked into their ecosystem but they are starting to push their luck with me trying to push this bullshit.

      • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        people KNOW they are just not friendly to repairing your shit easily.

        You know, I got into an argument about this recently and there were 3 different people trying to argue exactly the opposite to me. And they used ifixit’s scores as evidence. So no, people don’t know. Apple’s disinformation works.

      • sodiumbromley@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        My partner and I left the apple ecosystem about a year ago. We got new phones and gave our old watches, airtags, and airpods to friends and family that wanted them. It felt like it was going to be too much to give up, but honestly it’s been great.

        There’s so much more freedom in every facet of the phone. Apple likes to give an option, a rich people option, and occasionally a truly professional tier. Leaving Apple behind, I have wireless earbuds I love that have an 8hr lifespan out of the dock. They were fifty dollars and they sound easily better than airpods. It felt like it would be expensive to leave, but the alternatives once you leave the ecosystem tend to be cheaper pound for pound.

  • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    1 year ago

    So sad. I got into argument just a few days ago and they used ifixit’s repairability score as justification for their nonsense.

  • downpunxx@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    1 year ago

    Has anyone been surprised in the slightest that Apple locks you in, since the 1980’s? I mean, it’s literally ALWAYS BEEN the shittiest company to do any tech work with because it’s so proprietary, in their hardware, software, entire ecosystem. THIS WAS ALWAYS THE PROBLEM WITH APPLE WHY HAVE SO MANY IDIOTS BOUGHT INTO IT.

    • DarkGamer@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      WHY HAVE SO MANY IDIOTS BOUGHT INTO IT.

      Good UI, familiarity, catering to non-tech people, marketing to certain lifestyles, and the hassle of migrating out of the apple ecosystem and buying new apps. At one time apple had better offerings than the PC world did, but when it caught up any reason to buy apple products at 1.5x the cost evaporated for me. This was long before smartphones.

          • downpunxx@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            you mean back when it’s only speciality was CAD and Music engineering, but no workflow, office or networking, yeah I remember

        • ByteWizard@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Photoshop mostly. Graphics people HAD to have a mac. Also Macintosh screens were better, or at least better than the average PC CRT.

          • Bartsbigbugbag@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            At least some of their displays still are. The current 16” MacBook Pro has a 3456x2234 (what else uses 1.5:1 aspect ratio, so weird…) resolution, with HDR1000, and pre-calibrated profiles for a variety of film and graphic design color spaces. Just a monitor matching those specs is close in price to a base model 16”. Then professionally calibrating it if you’re not set up to do so yourself isn’t cheap either.

            • biddy@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              That’s always been the way with Apple. If you fit into the 0.1% of users that can make use of their products, it’s good value. If you don’t, it’s bad value and so locked down there’s nothing you can do about it. Most people don’t need what Apple is offering, yet buy it anyway. That’s the part I don’t get.

    • merc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes, Apple locks you in, but Microsoft has always been worse. Apple’s options are proprietary, but Microsoft used their monopoly power to destroy their competitors like Netscape, and waged war against Linux. Meanwhile, Apple switched to a variation of NeXTSTEP which is mostly compatible with Unix and the GNU tools.

      On the iPod / iPhone front, both Google and Apple lock users in to their app stores. Both manufacture un-repairable phones. The non-standard Lightning connector was a pain in the ass, but so was the frequent switching on Android phones from mini-B B to micro-B to USB-C. And, until USB-C there was the constant problem of trying to plug in the phone and getting the orientation of the plug wrong, something Apple got right with Lightning.

      Then there’s advertising / surveillance. Google is an ad-tech company so privacy is never going to be high on their list of priorities for their end-users. Meanwhile, Apple led the way with App Tracking Transparency. Yes, Apple still surveils its users, but at least it doesn’t seem to use that data to rent eyeballs the way Google does.

      Google and Apple are both shitty companies, but if you want a modern smartphone you basically have to deal with one of them. Apple and Microsoft are both shitty companies but if you want a desktop or a laptop, without the constant toil of dealing with Linux, they’re your only options. So, it’s about what bothers you more: anticompetitive actions including embracing standards with the aim of destroying them from within, or annoying proprietary stuff? Planned obsolescence and an extreme aversion to fixability, or slightly less surveillance, a slightly more open system, but much more surveillance?

      Really, what’s needed is proper regulators who can reign in all these shitty companies.

    • sadreality@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Decent product with big marketing appealing to their desire to be uniquely elite

      People voted with their wallets

  • kitonthenet@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Mfs out here want to install their bootleg faceid in my phone at their sketchy self repair place so they can sell my data and break its security. Let’s not pretend ifixit isn’t the exact same rent seeking that apple is, they just want to be the middle man

    • moomoomoo309@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      62
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You know what’s funny? It’s not the independent repair shops stealing your data, it’s the “official” ones. https://www.theverge.com/2021/6/7/22522560/apple-repair-multimillion-iphone-nude-photos-privacy-settlement-pegatron

      Those “bootleg” screens often are genuine, but Apple makes features not work unless paired. You can literally swap the screens of two fresh out of the box iPhones and they won’t work. Swap them back, they work fine. Don’t defend their practices, and don’t believe the lies about repair they’ve been feeding you for years.

      • kitonthenet@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        often are genuine, but Apple makes features not work unless paired

        Because unless you pair the screen, the device has no way to know it’s genuine. If it’s not, it could implement any number of attacks, including keyloggers, screen stealers, etc

        don’t believe

        Why shouldn’t I? No one has given an argument that you can actually secure these peripherals without software locks, I bought my iPhone and MacBook because they offer security, even when I run Linux on it my MacBook has far superior boot security (the only thing apple has engineering control over in that use case) than any intel machines I’ve used

        Also lol that article, you know the difference between one incident and a pervasive effort to mine your privacy for profit

          • kitonthenet@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            No, give me the argument that you can secure these interfaces, some of which provide biometric security, without verifying vendor origin in software

            • greyhathero@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              15
              ·
              1 year ago

              You cannot and that’s ok. The problem here is people have different levels of risk acceptance and that’s ok. If I was a government or corporate leader I would probably prefer buying direct from apple, but most end consumers, especially those who want to do these repairs should have the choice to accept that risk on a device that they own. The manufacturer shouldn’t decide who I trust. The owner should.

              • kitonthenet@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                people have different levels of risk acceptance and that’s ok

                Except it is the editorial agenda of ifixit to promote legislation that requires this lesser level of security, which makes it not ok. Outlawing verification in software requires all devices to have the same vulnerability at the interface, it would even affect users who want to buy OEM.

                • greyhathero@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Noone is saying it should be outlawed. What they are saying is that in order for a device to be considered highly repairable to an end user this type of check should be able to be turned off or not included.

                • ink@r.nf
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  requires all devices to have the same vulnerability at the interface

                  Tell me you don’t know shit about tech without telling me you don’t know shit about tech.

                  But, my god, Steve jobs would laugh at how easy his marketing techniques made dumb people feel smart.

                • Zangoose
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  You can have both though. Just add some random menu in the settings that turns bright red when using a non-certified component so security can be easily verified, but don’t needlessly lock people out and charge $500 to fix a $10-50 module on a $1000 phone

                  Edit: Adding on to this, Ifixit isn’t outlawing verification, the above example of whatever red warning is a clear way they could keep it.

            • cobra89@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              Um how exactly do you think these “rogue devices” would exfiltrate that data? Do you think iOS is providing Internet access to the faceID module or the display? Or do you think these devices somehow contain an entire wifi chipset to connect to the Internet to exfiltrate your data without anyone noticing an entire extra SoC soldered onto the part?

              Please provide any argument as to why you think these could exfiltrate data over these interfaces? Unless you think iOS’s security is so poor that it lets any hardware device that’s attached to it get full network access? (Which I’m pretty sure is not physically even possible in most cases since those connectors are only capable of sending the type of data across for that particular sensor.)

              • kitonthenet@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                To exfiltrate the login password from a keylogger on a macbook, for example, you need to have some software running on the cpu as well as the keyboard itself. This makes it very difficult to do in reality, as you have to infect both devices and if you do not have physical access, your exploit needs to be done across the keyboard interface, which makes it very hard to do in practice. Swapping any random keyboard in that could potentially be malicious introduces two issues, as now the keyboard itself may have a keylogger, as well as opening the possibility of exploiting some vulnerability in the cpu from the keyboard itself. You therefore open two attack surfaces that were previously closed, which is highly significant.

                • Zangoose
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  If you think keyloggers require software running on your physical keyboards you’re in for a rude awakening.

                  Keyloggers are almost always at a pure software level and are conceptually simple to make. So simple that in fact, it’s the same thing as running a regular application with background shortcuts. The only thing that is different is that regular apps aren’t saving/recording anything, they’re just listening for you to press cmd+whatever.

                  It takes maybe ~10-15 minutes to make a keylogger in Python that could run on any computer, mac, windows, or Linux. Maybe a little longer if you wanted to use a compiled language and properly hide it.

                  Sorry to burst your bubble.

                  • A software developer
            • ursakhiin@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Why isn’t purchasing the part through Apple enough?

              And also Is the consumer not allowed to assume the risk of going through after market repair that you seem to be concerned about?

              This issue has always been about Apple trying to force older iPhones into obsolescence. They want the freedom to eventually say that no more parts exist for that device so you’ll have to upgrade. If repair shops can leverage broken phones to repair other phones, that extends the life of the device part Apples plans.

              Most people will continue using older phones as long as they can because they don’t need the latest phone.

        • CalcProgrammer1@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          How the hell do you expect a screen to keylog you? This is a stupid argument. Even if the screen did know when the onscreen keyboard was visible how tf do you expect the logged data to go anywhere? Are you seriously worried that aftermarket iphone screens are including hidden LTE modems (and thus paying for illegitimate service) just to potentially log your keys? Do you realize how difficult and ridiculous this would be?

          • NightAuthor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I bet someone could make that actually happen, but if they could do that they’d probably just find or buy a software vulnerability to attack you with.

        • DarthYoshiBoy@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          As always, there is an XKCD for this.

          https://xkcd.com/538/

          Aside the whole issue that a single component in a system exfiltrating data without cooperation from many of the other components in the system is just patently absurd, the honest truth is that anyone who wants to break your security isn’t going to go to the extreme length of making certain your screen is replaced with a covert unit that can somehow inform them of anything you’re doing when for most cases a pair of binoculars will get the same job done for much cheaper and is at least half as convoluted, a hit to the head with a $5 wrench gets your fingerprint much more easily than a replacement fingerprint scanner does, and most compromises of a user would be far more effectively done in software rather than hardware. Software which constantly has new bugs to exploit while getting a crooked piece of hardware navigated into place is just an absurdly unlikely occurrence that would require a massive coverup the size of which is out of the reach of most entities in existence.

        • moomoomoo309@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Do you have any evidence that there’s a pervasive effort from third party repair to mine your privacy for profit? I’d love to see it.

          Also, fine, let’s assume they have no way of knowing it’s genuine. Why don’t they release the tool to pair the OEM screens publicly? It’d only work on the real ones, and they have such a tool, so if it’s actually about security, there’s no reason not to.

    • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      1 year ago

      Do you really think that replacing FaceID suddenly gives thieves unfettered access to your phone?

        • Neve8028@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          25
          ·
          1 year ago

          If a lock is broken, then you might call a locksmith to fix or replace it. This is something that happens frequently and isn’t as absurd as you make it out to be.

          • kitonthenet@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m not saying it has to be absurd, but no one is acknowledging that the security risks are real, and requiring a lesser standard of security is a cost of legislating this stuff, which it is the editorial stance of ifixit to support

            • Maalus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              18
              ·
              1 year ago

              The security risks aren’t real. They are simply trying to scare off people like you who will repeat nonsense over and over again.

                • Zangoose
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  21
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  No, you can’t, because that isn’t a good analogy. Those two situations are not at all the same, but I’ll humor you.

                  The analogy you’re making is like saying only the company who makes doors is allowed to change the lock on your door, and they’re allowed to just stop offering the lock-changing service whenever they want. They also conveniently put a mechanism in so that whenever a third-party locksmith comes, your door falls apart. Your only option is to buy a new door, doorknob, frame, and hinge because your lock is worn out.

                • papertowels
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  That’s a bad comparison because I wouldn’t let a random Internet stranger fix my phone either, but I would allow an actual locksmith to change my locks.

                • NightAuthor@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  If you swap the faceid, you still need to unlock the phone with your passcode to re-enroll faceid.

                  I guess that’d be more like you changing the outside doorknob.

        • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m assuming this is supposed to be metaphorical but you don’t seem to understand that it is not analogous because replacing FaceID doesn’t suddenly give you access to the device.

          • kitonthenet@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            It absolutely could, if the processor trusts that the data coming from the faceid sensor is accurate, the faceid sensor can simply lie. You’re removing a layer of defense, which necessarily impacts security

            • NightAuthor@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              What’s the faceid sensor going to do, brute force a damn cryptographic collision with the cyphertext of your faceid?!

              If you have even the first fucking clue, even in the broadest of strokes, I’d really be interested in hearing about how this would actually work.

              • Fogle@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                I think he think the face id just says “yeah, that’s right, unlock” and the phone unlocks. So if you put in a custom one that always says “yeah unlock” it will just always unlock. As if the person putting in the thing couldn’t see the data on your storage anyway

        • papertowels
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Never owned an apple device, so I might be drastically off base here.

          Is face id actually its own unit, including authentication storage?

          If I were designing the iPhone, I’d just use a camera that relays the data to the CPU, and authentication happens there. If it operates like this, a more accurate comparison is I’d let a third party reputable locksmith change my locks, but I’ll set the key pins myself after.