[tinyhitman]

While I'm not disagreeing that this should be possible to (easily) factory reset a device, it also shouldn't be possible for just _anyone_ with physical access to completely reset the device either. Easy resets also mean more interesting to steal

[PurpleFoxy]

It should just ask for your Apple ID password when you do the reset. It’s not that hard. Honestly it should even be an option within the main OS

[southerntofu]

Why, though? Physical access to the hardware should prevent you from accessing existing files (encryption at rest) but should not prevent you from resetting/reusing the device.

Does your fridge come with FridgeID? Or a book? Introducing such mechanisms is really hostile to users, especially poorer users of second-hand hardware who have to go through extra (shady) hoops to get a device running just because some rich Silicon Valley start-uppers thought locking hardware down was a feature.

[blacksmith_tb]

I think the argument that locking down hardware is unfair to thieves is not likely to garner a lot of support. But the larger argument that it's unfair to users should. The majority of whom didn't know they were signing up for a machine that is so theft-proof they can't give it to a grandparent or donate it to a school. I don't think it's unreasonable to say that easily-bricked hardware leads to more sales for Apple (and I hope I don't need to wipe my Mini any time soon...)

[southerntofu]

> I think the argument that locking down hardware is unfair to thieves

That was not my point. Most times, users of a stolen device are unaware and not complicit in the fact it was stolen in the first place. They usually have acquired it from legitimate second-hand markets.

[blacksmith_tb]

That's a good point, thanks for clarifying it.

[lupire]

Who is going to walk a away with my fridge? How about my car? Many users appreciate having anti-theft protections on their easy to physically-access devices, and very few need to wipe of the owner's account.

It's great that you have a niche use case, but that doesn't make your case the priority over the main use cases.

[southerntofu]

> Who is going to walk a away with my fridge?

People would steal your wallet, your jewelry... There's a lot more value to be extracted from a stolen credit card than from a "smart" phone.

> It's great that you have a niche use case, but that doesn't make your case the priority over the main use cases.

You're taking it the other way around. The common use case for first-world software developers is the niche use case for the rest of the world. In the rest of the world (i.e. the vast majority), who can't afford buying new luxury devices, people are more concerned with getting locked out after forgetting their password (or after their kids changed it) or about acquiring a second-hand device, than about "protecting" their device from thieves.

Because this "protection" doesn't protect anything. Once your iPhone is stolen, it's gone. No iCloud lock is going to bring it back, so why prevent other, less-privileged folks from using it when you can't use it? That type of "mine or noone else's" capitalist mentality is actively harming users and destroying the environment

https://www.ifixit.com/News/34072/apples-activation-lock-wil...

[crististm]

Think of it as a 'fuck you' to the thief and whoever might get the brick. Maybe you get that, otherwise you can be bitter all you want about the inequality and how stealing will resolve that.

[kstrauser]

More practically, I want to remove the financial incentive from stealing my phone. I want a thief to see it and think "why bother, I can't get anything for it".

[1996]

> Once your iPhone is stolen, it's gone. No iCloud lock is going to bring it back, so why prevent other, less-privileged folks from using it when you can't use it?

Because I would like to inflict damage back. Stealing from me cause damage. I do not believe thieves should get a free pass on causing me damages just because they are less privileged.

Ideally, a small amount of C4 and a "remote explode" taking a few fingers off the thief would be a proper deterrent, as well as a good use of Sharia law.

[crististm]

Yes. In a PC ecosystem this is true - physical access renders the machine in your control (modulo Intel Management System and other backdoor schemes).

For Apple, there is a different set of axioms and some people seem to agree with them.

[southerntofu]

> For Apple, there is a different set of axioms and some people seem to agree with them.

I don't think this is true for all Apple products though, or at least that was not the case in the past. To my knowledge, setting up a free OS on a second-hand Macbook has never been a problem.

However, you are correct Apple is trying to impose new axioms with the iPhones: unique app market (taking controversial posture, such as forbidding alternative browser engines), iCloud lock, non-interoperable hardware (eg. power socket)...

[aulin]

we used to say there's no security if you have physical access... any measure to protect physical access vulnerabilities is bound to cause annoyances and limit freedom of what you can do with your own devices sooner or later

[elcomet]

Why though ? If someone wants to harm you, they can damage the hard drive enough so that the data is unreadable if they have physical access.

[superhuzza]

So that they can use/sell the stolen Macbook, which is much more common than stealing a Macbook to delete the data.

[user-the-name]

Erasing the drive doesn't let you do this, the Apple ID of the owner is stored elsewhere and you have to log in to restore the machine.

[superhuzza]

This was a response to a comment about a potential feature as described:

"Why does the recovery not just have a button called factory reset which unlinks your apple account, deletes the volume and then sets it all up like new."

So yes, it currently does not work like that. But such a feature would allow Macbooks to be easily stolen and reused by others.

[PurpleFoxy]

The unlink stage would require your password. The recovery partition requires internet to reinstall already.

[josephg]

Yep, just like it does on iPhones - where Apple has a button for this and it’s really easy. I’m sure a lot more iPhones get stolen than laptops every year, and I doubt the factory reset button behind its password prompt makes that any worse.

[acomjean]

The weird thing is that when my partner turned in an old Mac mini to Apple for recycling they wouldn’t do it because her account was still on there and there was a system password.

But we couldn’t figure out what they were talking about, we had reinstalled the OS. It’s embeded in there somewhere deep.

[willstrafach]

If it had a T2, that will store the Apple ID.

[southerntofu]

What's wrong with using stolen hardware? I mean we could argue stealing is wrong, in which case we'd have to take a look at why people are stealing and from whom (partitioning of wealth) so we can find solutions.

If we're not looking at the root of the problem, then we're just complicating legitimate use cases. Preventing theft is only the official argument, but it doesn't stand any form of scrutiny: as long as there's inequality (i.e. incentives to expropriate people who have too much, to serve people who have too little) there will be theft.

The truth behind iCloud lock is Apple has been involved in mafia-style dealings with national mobile phone operators (which involved promises/contracts to sell millions of units), inundating the market with operator-sponsored iPhones, and they really don't want a second-hand market at all because they are a luxury brand.

[simonh]

Most victims of crime are also socially disadvantaged, so enough with the Robin Hood crap. Theft is also strongly associated with violence, intimidation and mental stress on the victims. Promoting or justifying crimes in your comments here is reckless and irresponsible.

If someone wants to sell a device second hand it's pretty easy to voluntarily wipe your device. Apple devices have very long lives, receive software updates for much longer than competing devices and keep their second hand value very well and so make excellent and very economical second hand devices. Contrary to your claims of Apple not wanting a second hand market, they support the device wiping process and even have a trade in program that channels refurbished iPhones to 3rd world countries.

If you really do care about the environment and supply chain ethics, you'll also be happy to know Apple get the highest score of any of the big tech companies from Greenpeace. In fact the only tech company at all that beats them is Fairphone, but since they get only 2 years of updates I think Greenpeace doesn't sufficiently take into account device longevity.

[southerntofu]

> Most victims of crime are also socially disadvantaged

True in most cases, but not when it comes to owning a recent iPhone. Millions of people struggle for eating decently, and most of these folks are certainly not spending >500€ on a phone.

What may not have been clear in my original comment is most users who have a stolen device don't have knowledge of it, and are not complicit in it. So why do they have to be the ones paying the price?

> If someone wants to sell a device second hand it's pretty easy to voluntarily wipe your device.

In my experience, it's not uncommon that neighbors seek support because a relative offered them their old phone willingly but are far away and unable to remember their password over the phone. Sometimes, it's a phone/account they had not used in years. I've encountered this situation at least twice in the past year, and i'm not even working in a computer/phone shop.

> Fairphone, but since they get only 2 years of updates I think Greenpeace doesn't sufficiently take into account device longevity

Fairphone only supports updates for 2 years, but there's a growing ecosystems of distros targeting the Fairphones (LineageOS, /e/, PostmarketOS), while Apple have been condemned for pushing updates that made iPhones slower (to encourage them buying new ones).

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-51413724

[Toutouxc]

> So why do they have to be the ones paying the price?

What price?

The original price of the device? Because we all do.

Or the price of having to buy a different machine than the $200 MacBook from the shady person online which came without the original box, warranty or charger? For the same reason, and also because they're stupid.

[simonh]

There’s no way to slice out crime against owners of a ‘recent iPhone’ as being acceptable, crime doesn’t work like that. There’s no way you can know when buying a stolen phone who it was taken from but disproportionately they come form people who can least afford to lose them.

There are over a billion iOS devices active right now, are all of those people rich exploiters who deserve to have their phones stolen? What your saying isn’t anti-capitalist, it’s advocating disproportionate oppression of the most vulnerable in society and you should be thoroughly ashamed of yourself.

How dare you come here, advocate crime and criticise owners of devices with the highest recyclability, lowest ecological impact and longest device lifetimes in the industry on moral grounds.

I’m sure your perfectly aware of what the purpose of those software updates were, to extend device lifetimes when batteries start to fail, but you’re perfectly prepared to betray your ecological ideals which should be in favour of this in order to score points. It’s absolutely disgraceful. These arguments might work against people unaware of the facts, but you’re not going to get away with this disingenuous claptrap here.

[southerntofu]

Why downvote? Please argue with facts. Although i understand defending vendor lock-in, ecological damage, and forced sales is a hard sell... All the more when trying to protect from criticism a corporation making billions on the backs of exploited children in mines & factories.

[jaywalk]

Your arguments are 100% nonsense and 0% facts, so most people will see it as a waste of time to try and have a discussion with you.

[southerntofu]

> The truth behind iCloud lock is Apple has been involved in mafia-style dealings with national mobile phone operators (which involved promises/contracts to sell millions of units), inundating the market with operator-sponsored iPhones, and they really don't want a second-hand market at all because they are a luxury brand.

Apple investigated for "planned" obsolescence by the French government: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-42615378 (they have also settled for 500M$ in a previous case)

Apple was condemned and fined for illegal clauses in France in contracts with national cellphone operators (i believe the 4 of them):

https://www.universfreebox.com/article/34513/Apple-accuse-d-...

Specifically, they were condemned for:

- forcing the operator to buy a minimum amount of devices over 3 years - preventing the operator from defining target prices - forcing the operator to give funds to a marketing agency affiliated to Apple - forcing the operator to finance the marketing of iPhones in store, mandating a minimal marketing budget - enabling Apple to use the trademarks of the operator, but not the other way around - imposes strict conditions for device orders, but lifts any responsibility on Apple's side - forces the operator to financially support device repairs - gives Apple the right to break said contract, without respecting legal delays - enables Apple to use patents from the operator

Some of this was covered on public television by "Cash Investigation", so that was quite a public outcry. But this is only for France, and i'm assuming such mafia-like practices are common in other countries, as they are common in different branches of industry (not just IT, where well-known example include Microsoft and Intel).

About the consequences for the environment and (lack of) recycling of electronic waste:

https://www.cnet.com/news/the-environmental-pitfalls-at-the-... https://techhq.com/2020/12/right-to-repair-combating-techs-d... https://www.vox.com/2017/11/8/16621512/where-does-my-smartph...

About Apple not wanting a second hand market, i obviously meant a second hand market they do not control. They do have certified programs for second hard hardware. Sorry if that was not clear.

I hope i've provided enough evidence of the facts i was presenting. Please let me know if that's not the case.

[ciupicri]

Is it that hard to just corrupt the file system?

[tinus_hn]

Like iPhones, new Macs are linked to an account and you can’t activate a new installation without access to the account. This is a pretty strong theft deterrent.

Of course this only works if you need access to the account to break this link.

[southerntofu]

I strongly disagree with your opinion. For economic reason, i'm using (and supporting many users from my neighborhood of) second-hand hardware. Some systems like Apple's make our life incredibly difficult and most times people will just have to pay a shady phone store to have the device they purchased unlocked, adding 20-30€ to the bill.

It's important to note that most people are incredibly gullible when it comes to technology, and they won't hesitate to buy a second-hand iPhone (whether stolen or not) for a few bucks assuming they'll be able to use it, because that's what a phone does, only to find themselves trapped in iCloud lock.

Locking devices does not protect users (contrary to encrypting the local storage), and does not deter anyone from stealing. It simply adds one layer of mafia to deal with (iCloud unlock shady companies) when you're just trying to find a second-hand phone.

[matthias509]

Your statement regarding the lack of deterrence does not match reality. See https://transition.fcc.gov/bureaus/oet/tac/tacdocs/meeting12...

"Similar to New York City, San Francisco also provides evidence that mobile device theft prevention technologies work. In 2009, Apple smartphones constituted the vast majority (69%) of smartphones stolen in San Francisco robberies; in the six months after Apple made Activation Lock available, iPhone robberies in San Francisco declined 38%."

[ska]

> and does not deter anyone from stealing.

This statement appears to be false, which I guess is the entire point.

People absolutely should be able to sell a device second hand, so perhaps re-authentication should be easier and more obvious, but making stolen equipment harder to sell is a net win.

[dsabanin]

You are not making any sense by saying it does not deter anyone from stealing. Sooner or later everyone will know that buying stolen Apple hardware is meaningless, and without a market to sell into, thiefs will be less interested in stealing it.