So Much for the Right to Repair with Apple

[KuruPrionz]

There are lots of possibilities to have saved these computers. The original owner apparently did not give on single crap about any of them, just wanted money. 

The buyer, well intentioned or not, did not do their due diligence either. Can't fix? Don't buy. Simple. 

 

That's 2 major errors not made by Apple. Are they supposed to babysit the imbeciles that transact in Mac computers?

If we make them responsible for their products after the fact, how far do we take this before backing off?

 

There's an automobile junkyard in Fresno that is so large it can be seen from outer space, Turners. Are all the car manufacturers responsible for all the crapped out, smashed, rusting automobiles? 

 

Seems like an infinite rabbit hole to me... 

 

 

 

[analogika]

22 hours ago, Anderton said:

 

If the computer had a "suicide option" that wiped the data and then returned it to the factory default, then there's no more original owner to protect. It would be fine if only Apple could initiate this. After all, in 2016, Tim Cook said to protect the user's privacy, Apple would never create a backdoor to its iPhone operating system. In 2021, Apple created a backdoor to the iPhone. That might have had something to do with this. If they know how to create a backdoor to allow the government access, surely they can create a backdoor Apple alone can access to wipe the machine.

 

Calling that a "backdoor" is disingenuous at best. 

 

That's like calling a fire alarm a "backdoor" into your apartment. 

 

It's the complete opposite. Yes, it's done at the behest of a higher entity (where required), but it's reporting a particular status from within a safe and closed space to an outside authority. It is NOT in any way, shape or form a channel for outside authorities to enter or take control of that space, which is what a backdoor is. 

 

Quite apart from the fact that it's been shelved, as mentioned. 

 

 

22 hours ago, Anderton said:

 

In fact, Apple already builds in a benign backdoor for diagnostic purposes. Obviously this is something they know how to do - they've done it!

 

I'm quite certain this is what they do when they run remote diagnostics on your phone when you go in for a Genius Bar appointment. I've had it done. 

 

It's a) tied to the Apple ID the device is locked to, and b) it requires authorisation, in person, on the device.

 

I suppose it could technically be changed to pop up on any device tied to that Apple ID, but for one, I don't see how that would solve the problem, and b) that just adds a phishing layer to legitimising stolen devices — or, in the case of stolen private machines, it would just pop up a message that most users might be inclined to just dismiss they way non-tech users usually do, defeating the whole purpose of activation lock in the first place. 

 

 

22 hours ago, Anderton said:

Oh, but the reseller makes money from refurbing it? So what? Apple wasn't going to make any money from it anyway. This way they make $150.

 

What irks me about the particular case that's making the rounds is that the corporation actually assumes that this stuff has been destroyed. And if that was actually the job the company got paid to do, then selling it off instead of destroying it is, at least here in Germany, fencing stolen goods. 

 

So you've got this guy who bought dozens of stolen computers and is now raising a stink about Apple not being willing to unlock them for him. 

 

I get the waste aspect, really, I do. But that really isn't the problem here. 

 

22 hours ago, Anderton said:

Or doesn't care enough, or know enough, or can't be bothered...and doesn't consider there are consequences. It seems ridiculous that a computer that has many years of service ahead of it has to go into a landfill because the owner either doesn't give a damn, is ignorant, or Apple doesn't have a way to prevent this.

 

Maybe I'm just more sensitive than most. I've been recycling everything I could since 1975, had my business go paperless a couple years later, and repair devices whenever possible inttead of replacing them. Given the amount of pollution and dangerous/carcinogenic chemicals required to produce electronic devices - and yes, that includes synthesizers, Microsoft Surfaces, laptops, you name it - you'd think companies would not have a cavalier attitude about what they contribute to the problem. But that would interfere with profits, wouldn't it? Never mind. 

 

I think Apple are the worst possible company to target for this — but of course, they make the best press target, as always. 

 

I am not sure how Apple could solve this issue in a way that wouldn't undermine the whole point of why they're doing it in the first place: The assumption that information is worth MUCH more than the hardware that contains it. 

 

I suppose you could legislate that anybody who sells a working piece of electronics has to ensure that it is open and freely accessible, but how the hell would you enforce that? 

 

I see your issue, and it grinds on me, as well, but I haven't a clue how to solve it. 

[Anderton]

8 hours ago, Joe Muscara said:

There's a process that can be done. Basically you turn on File Vault, boot into Recovery Mode, unlock the SSD, and then erase it. This should leave the SSD with only encrypted data on it that's unreadable. But this process can take a long time. I'm not surprised they didn't do it.

 

I don't understand how that process defeats the T2 chip?

 

5 hours ago, analogika said:

 

I see your issue, and it grinds on me, as well, but I haven't a clue how to solve it. 

 

 

I don't expect you to - you're not Apple, you didn't design this, and you're not the richest tech company in the world. Maybe I'm just naive, but I find it difficult to believe some clever person at Apple can't come up with a solution. Is this guy a zealot? Maybe. But perhaps some things are worth getting zealous about, and are worth pressuring people to find a solution.

 

What's more, I'm beginning to think I'm the only person who read the Twitter thread on which the article was based. First of all, the guy who made a big deal of this was NOT hired to destroy the computers and was NOT receiving stolen goods. He buys computers from licensed recyclers for the parts, because they can't be made whole. So, his business actually benefits from the situation. If he wanted to make more money, he would simply shut up. But he has the same problem I do about perfectly good computers being destroyed. (He also turns broken computers into art, if you're curious to see what you can do with a computer that has a partially working/broken screen. ) 

 

Anyway, I think the comments and responses from the author in the Twitter thread cover most of the comments here as well:

 

In response to a question:

 

Author: "The laptop in the image is wiped but still locked, and most activation locked devices from recyclers are wiped, so it’s really not a data security issue, although that doesn’t stop people from using it as an argument."

 

Comment: "can't you just stick linux on them and make them whole again?"

 

Author: "No, as of the proprietary Apple chips (T2, M1) there really is no Linux compatibility.  Plus, the default configuration of a T2 machine is to disallow booting to an external device, so you're locked out of being able to boot to a Linux installer regardless"

 

Comment: "My company has recycled/tossed over 2,500 iCloud locked units in the last 2-3 years. We are just *ONE* shop. Imagine the total waste Apple has generated because of this. Unreal. And with these components becoming harder and more expensive to produce. Unreal."

 

Author: "And the sad thing is, these devices die quiet deaths and nobody ever knows.  The recycling industry and especially certifications like R2 put the nails in the coffin by making it far worse and then greenwashing it away."

 

Comment: "I see the same shit at Thrift Stores. How is it that people are this lazy to not remove their personal data/iCloud login before getting rid of these devices? Same goes w/ companies & schools."

 

Author: "There is laziness, but the lock design is also at fault because it does not accommodate human tendencies and millions of good devices get locked."

 

Comment: "luckily it's possible bypass icloudlock T2 now with just one click software and you got a full working MacBook really to use"

 

Author: "Bypassed MacBooks are hacked and can’t be legitimately resold in the retail market, especially when you have 1000 of them. Bypass is useless for commercial purposes because it's unethical to sell bypassed machines -- the user forgets and resets it 2 years from now, and then they are screwed."

 

Comment: "Authorised Service Providers will be able to remove the lock if you're able to provide Proof of Purchase. Companies should disable Activation lock within their MDM, since the Organisation registration of the device itself is protection enough."

 

Author: "Yes that is true for an individual with one machine, but a recycler with hundreds or thousands that receive them from institutions that don't even bother to log our or return phone calls are a different situation entirely, and that is the situation that scraps millions."

 

Comment: "I think it's meant more as a theft deterrent than as a way to protect data.  Is there no way for the Apple ID owner to "release" the device for wiping and reuse?"

 

Author: "This laptop has been wiped [the one pictured in Twitter], and most have, so data destruction is absolutely not a valid argument. There is no way for a recycler that receives 3000 of these from a corporation to release them, although Apple could easily implement such a method."

 

Comment: "Why is this an Apple problem? Blame the former owner."

 

Author: "Because their flawed design leads to millions of perfectly good devices being scrapped. Problem is an institution dumps 1000 locked devices with recycler, then recycler sells them to another, then another.  I’ve never witnessed a recycler having success getting those 1000 unlocked.  It’s not a traditional consumer situation."

 

Comment: "I think it's an environmental issue really. There needs to be a better system for this...The carbon footprint has to be taken into consideration too."

 

Author: "Absolutely!  Apple and recyclers greenwash it away and convince the world that 'proper zero-landfill recycling' has occurred, when in reality reuse is infinitely better than recycling. 

 

Comment: "I'm curious - what happens to the machines like this which can be repaired & reinstalled? Are they mostly given to charities?"

 

Author: "There is a huge refurbishing industry that buys broken/working machines from recyclers, fixes them, and sells them back out into the world. Which is as it should be."

[Joe Muscara]

8 hours ago, Anderton said:

I don't understand how that process defeats the T2 chip?

Sorry, it doesn't. I was looking at it from the POV of the data. IOW, the reason for the T2 chip and locking down the computer is to secure the data on it. If I have a computer with the chip and an SSD and I want it to be reused instead of recycled, I don't want my data accessible but I need to unlock it so the next person can use it. This process would allow me to protect my data when I unlock the computer.

 

8 hours ago, Anderton said:

I'm the only person who read the Twitter thread

I rarely go near Twitter anymore, but that's a whole 'nother topic, isn't it?  

[Joe Muscara]

Thinking about this during a "rest break"  , I have to wonder, why are these resellers buying these locked Macs from the institutions if they know they won't be able to do anything with them? I'd say, "sorry, unless you unlock these, I can't accept them." You could have techs who could help the institution make sure the computers are unlocked and the data wiped before accepting them.

 

If they are refurbishers down the line, then again, why would you accept them? Tell the company who accepted them to do better by forcing the institution(s) to wipe them. I'm thinking it takes a big room with a lot of outlets and a few techs to set things up, then let them run (if you're doing the encrypt/erase I described above).

 

Again, maybe there's a better way Apple could make things easier like @Craig Andertonis talking about, but in the meantime, pressure needs to be put upstream on this process so these Macs aren't made dead weight, only to be ground up instead of reused.

 

But hey, consider me informed. I haven't purchased a used Mac in a number of years (and my last new one was 2018), but if I do, I now know I need to make sure the computer is unlocked and fully accessible before I buy it.

[AnotherScott]

19 minutes ago, Joe Muscara said:

Thinking about this during a "rest break"  , I have to wonder, why are these resellers buying these locked Macs from the institutions if they know they won't be able to do anything with them?

I don't think there's reason to believe that this is happening. It's not that companies are buying these things thinking they can be re-sold as functional units, and then finding out they are not. We're not talking about deception here, resellers know what they're doing, the companies that acquire these things know they're for scrap (or they would be presumed to be scrap unless steps were taken to assure they were not). I think the point is simply that these units are being scrapped for recycling, which is wasteful when they are still otherwise fully usable products.

[Anderton]

2 hours ago, AnotherScott said:

I don't think there's reason to believe that this is happening. It's not that companies are buying these things thinking they can be re-sold as functional units, and then finding out they are not. We're not talking about deception here, resellers know what they're doing, the companies that acquire these things know they're for scrap (or they would be presumed to be scrap unless steps were taken to assure they were not). I think the point is simply that these units are being scrapped for recycling, which is wasteful when they are still otherwise fully usable products.

 

Exactly. Thank you!!!