
Counterfeit Macbook charger teardown: convincing outside but dangerous inside - dcschelt
http://www.righto.com/2016/03/counterfeit-macbook-charger-teardown.html
======
stygiansonic
Ken Shirriff's teardowns are the best.

In particular, this comparison between different USB AC adapters was quite
illuminating:

[http://www.righto.com/2012/10/a-dozen-usb-chargers-in-lab-
ap...](http://www.righto.com/2012/10/a-dozen-usb-chargers-in-lab-apple-
is.html)

The legit ones have quite a bit of complexity inside their inconspicuous
package. The fake one carry some not-so-innocuous surprises inside.

~~~
stygiansonic
One other thing I've learned about counterfeiters is that there is almost no
product too cheap to counterfeit. If there is a suitable demand for the
product, there will be counterfeits. You can see this in the cheap USB AC
adapters above, but also in items like the Casio F-91W[1], a cheap retro watch
that has made a comeback in recent years.

Search on eBay and you'll find tons of them, mostly for really cheap prices,
i.e. < $10 or even < $5. It's virtually impossible to identify a fake on the
auction site, and even when you first have it it's difficult to tell. (Here[2]
is one test, and a teardown comparison between fake vs. real) So, just assume
anything super-cheap is fake, and you won't be let down.

However, there are some real differences. You'll notice that the band might
look/feel slightly cheaper, and most importantly, the thing doesn't keep time.
I have a legit F-91W, and for the most part, the watch doesn't gain/lose more
than maybe 1-3 minutes per year. The fake ones, however, are fast/slow by
10-20 minutes per month. This is likely where they are saving money, i.e. the
quartz oscillator thingy is either cheap or doesn't have calibration or
whatever. The battery life is also likely far worse than most Casios, (though
I have not confirmed this) which are generally excellent in this respect.

This is a watch that is regularly available on Amazon for a legit price of <
$15. (Right now, it's ~$10) And there are tons of fakes out there.

1\.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casio_F-91W](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casio_F-91W)

2\. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lk_-
_Phiklc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lk_-_Phiklc)

~~~
qb45
>
> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casio_F-91W](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casio_F-91W)

 _According to secret documents issued to interrogators at Guantánamo Bay,
obtained and released by The Guardian, "the Casio F-91W digital watch was
declared to be 'the sign of al-Qaeda' and a contributing factor to continued
detention of prisoners by the analysts stationed at Guantánamo Bay. Briefing
documents used to train staff in assessing the threat level of new detainees
advise that possession of the F91W – available online for as little as £4 –
suggests the wearer has been trained in bomb making by al-Qaeda in
Afghanistan." United States Military intelligence officials have identified
the F91W as a watch that terrorists use when constructing time bombs._

One learns something new every day. Good that I went with the W59 instead :)

~~~
pjc50
This does sound like a classic example of someone in the intelligence service
being bad at conditional probability. "All the people we captured wear F91Ws"
does not imply "everyone wearing an F91W is a terrorist"!

~~~
pbhjpbhj
But it does mean that scrutinising people with f91w watches should increase
detection rates.

~~~
ska
Sure, and I'm not saying you are wrong.

The point was that sensitivity and specificity are always a trade off. Failing
to understand this correctly has been a huge problem in practice.

Examining everyone who breathes, after all, has very high sensitivity.

------
est
Chinese fake capacitors

[http://i.imgur.com/k5i5EXW.jpg](http://i.imgur.com/k5i5EXW.jpg)

The scam was so successful it even ended up in a college EE textbook

[http://i.imgur.com/MUjlvAc.jpg](http://i.imgur.com/MUjlvAc.jpg) (the author
thought it was a normal type of capacitor.)

See moar outstanding Chinese counterfeit products here

[https://www.zhihu.com/question/37915231](https://www.zhihu.com/question/37915231)

The site (zhihu.com) itself is a copycat of Quora.

~~~
Laforet
The early 2000s were a horrorshow as far as capacitors were concerned.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacitor_plague](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacitor_plague)

~~~
coldpie
Wow, my friend's TV just failed. We cracked it open this past weekend and we
found a busted cap that looks just like those. Manufacture date would be
mid-2000s, probably 2006-ish. I wonder if they were from one of those bad
batches. Crazy coincidence to learn about this now.

Edit: Hm, maybe not: """With a typically shortened life span of about 1.5 to 3
years for the failing capacitors, from mid-2003 up to mid-2006, the last of
the bad capacitors should have failed by 2007. Commentators on the Internet
often predicted the year 2007 would be the end point for "bad capacitors"."""

------
nkurz
_I 'm puzzled as to why counterfeit chargers never manage to have sufficient
clearance distances. They use simple, low-complexity circuits so the circuit
board layout should be straightforward. Except in the smallest cube phone
chargers, they aren't fighting for every millimeter of space. It shouldn't
take much additional effort to make the boards safer._

I think this is an interesting question to ask. If there truly is no cost
difference, why not make a better and safer product? I'd guess that
"ignorance" (or at least a different assessment of risk) is the most likely
answer. The person laying out the circuit has learned by trial and error,
doesn't really understand the safety issues, isn't incentivized to spend time
learning about them, and lacks oversight from anyone more knowledgeable.

Is there a better theory?

~~~
nickff
It's difficult to know why anyone laid out a circuit one specific way,
especially without a complete schematic, layout, and a few hours to think
about it. It may be that this design was the only way to fit the circuit into
an already designed enclosure, or it could be that this was done for some sort
of manufacturability reason, they may have also had some issue with noise and
done this to shield some part of the circuit. In addition, though the design
may not meet the UL standards, it might be good enough. UL standards are
neither necessary nor sufficient to guarantee safety and reliability.

I find many of the OP's criticisms to be rather facile, and would prefer to
see this 'counterfeit' tested to failure, with the results compared to a
genuine Apple product. Armed with this comparison, we could judge whether the
cost savings were achieved wisely or through foolish design.

Any reader of hardware teardowns should remember that the majority of people
writing these pieces have never designed a challenging, original circuit;
almost all of them are just implementing designs given to them by IC
manufacturers in 'application notes'.

~~~
jhallenworld
I would guess the company does not have design safety reviews or processes.
The mechanical design could push the layout into an unsafe zone, but no safety
review to push it back.

The spacing rules are certainly real requirements, look for clearance and
creepage:

[https://www.ieee.li/pdf/essay/safety_considerations_in_power...](https://www.ieee.li/pdf/essay/safety_considerations_in_power_supply_design.pdf)

~~~
nickff
I know of and understand the spacing rules, but even one millimeter of (air)
clearance can isolate up to 1500V if the board is clean (and more if you take
solder mask into account). You can have as many design reviews as you want,
and processes are very well and good, but they really don't answer the
question of whether the design is sufficiently safe and reliable. Testing to
failure is the only way to know what the product is capable of, as many
designs have failure modes which are very difficult to imagine.

I agree the design doesn't comply with UL or IEEE standards, and that means it
cannot be sold at retail in North America, but that doesn't mean the product
is unreliable or unsafe.

------
ChrisDutrow
This is a bit of a PR issue as well. I think most people don't know that when
they pay more for a genuine charger, they are getting value for their money.

I think most people feel like Apple is ripping them off on replacement
chargers. That's why many people will still buy chargers with an obvious flaw
like a plastic ground pin. They just think it's not quite as nice as the metal
version but still works fine (they probably don't know the pin is for
grounding at all... or what grounding something even means).

An irony is that people do trust they are getting value Apple's expensive
primary product (iPhone, Laptop, iPad...)

~~~
joshvm
The problem is that every time my Macbook charger (I'm on my third in seven
years, soon to get number 4 as this one is dying) has failed, it's not been
the charger itself, it's crappy strain relief and thin cables. I'm happy to
pay $65 for a new charger block, but when it's just the cable that's failed,
I'm not getting value for money.

I bought a counterfeit charger once (on purpose) and gave up using it after it
sparked while I was in bed. Having that protection circuitry is really useful
when your whole laptop case is grounded.

I mentioned in another post, but this is why I'm excited for USB-C power
delivery. Finally companies can deliver the AC mains cable, the power brick
and the charging cable as separate replaceable components.

~~~
ChrisDutrow
I've seen the USB-C cables for sale and heard they are great, but don't know
of any devices that use them yet. Do you know any devices that are using them
yet?

~~~
f_allwein
The MacBook is:
[http://www.apple.com/macbook/specs/](http://www.apple.com/macbook/specs/)

------
ChuckMcM
This is a pretty awesome teardown, the fake ones really are crap _and_ they
don't do the magsafe protocol (also on Ken's blog:
[http://www.righto.com/2013/06/teardown-and-exploration-of-
ma...](http://www.righto.com/2013/06/teardown-and-exploration-of-
magsafe.html))

------
imh
I stopped buying brand name macbook chargers when the plastic on the cable
frayed on my fourth charger. The difference from the other three times was
that this time, it started smoking where it frayed. Had I not been paying
attention, who knows what would have happened. I took it to the apple store
and told them what happened and that I had bought it from them within the
year, asking for a replacement. They said it was excluded from the warranty
because it was "normal wear and tear" or something like that.

Say what you will for the counterfeits, but they use heavy plastic and
actually seem less likely to burn down your apartment. And cost a fraction of
the brand ones.

~~~
Larrikin
I've never had a single cord fray on me before it was time to replace whatever
it plugged in to, except for every single Apple cord I've ever had. What are
some good alternatives? I'm tired of replacing the electrical tape on my MBPr
charger brick.

~~~
iheartmemcache
Wow, I can't believe Apple still has a fray problem. I remember my OS 9 G3
Powerbook went through 3 or 4 chargers. Don't risk buying from a 3rd party
vendor (read my post below). The best you're going to be able to do is to get
thick gauge, heat-shrink wrap tubing and use your wife's hair dryer if you
don't have a hot air gun. I've used this brand[1] before with success.

[1] [http://www.amazon.com/Anytime-Tools-Shrink-Sleeve-
Assorted/d...](http://www.amazon.com/Anytime-Tools-Shrink-Sleeve-
Assorted/dp/B008WWC6FU/ref=sr_1_2?s=industrial&ie=UTF8&qid=1458523678&sr=1-2)

~~~
nkurz
After the third official adapter cord destroyed itself, I've taken to
repairing them with heat-shrink tubing as well. The tricky part is that unless
you want to cut and resolder the cord, you need to get heat-shrink tubing
that's large enough to fit over the end connector.

I've found that 3/8" heat shrink fits over the connector, but 1/4" does not.
But the 3/8" (at least for the brand I got) does not constrict down enough to
fit tightly on the think cable. So I bulk up the cable with 1/4" silicone
aquarium air pump tubing.

Instructions: Cut one ~4" piece of silicone tubing, slit lengthwise, and put
just below the connector. Cut another ~4" piece of silicone tubing, slit
lengthwise, put over the first piece of tubing with the slit on the opposite
side. Put this second piece slightly higher, so "top" of tubing covers the
base of the connector, and the "bottom" of tubing is ~1/4" shy of the inner
layer.

Then cut a piece of 3/8" heat shrink to ~4.5" long. Slide the heat shrink over
the connector on to the two layers of silicone tubing, so the "top" is tight
to the L of the connector, and the "bottom" extends just past the farther
(inner) tubing. Then shrink the tubing with some appropriate heat source (or
carefully shrink with an inappropriate source like a match or lighter).

~~~
iheartmemcache
I just emailed this to off to the couple of friends of mine who still use
MBP's. This is a real, _real_ clever solution. Read this post, it's _very_
clever not just as an instructive on heat-shrink repair, but the composition
(if I'm visualizing this correctly) also functions as strain relief, which is
ultimately the cause of fray[1]. My way around the 'over the connector' was
just to oversize via teflon tape (naive solution, I know), but your idea is
simple yet genius (silicone is soft, so it won't score the existing exterior
of the wire, and silicone is rigid enough to act as auxiliary support).

If you're rough on your gear (I've thrown my laptop into a TSA container in a
5:30AM grog more times that I can count), I'd do this as a precautionary
measure even if you don't see any damage yet. It might not look pretty, but
functionality over form any day.

[1] combined with using thin wire shielding in order to maintain a 'sleek'
aesthetic

~~~
nkurz
Thanks. Yes, the goal of the step-down on the cable end is to improve the
strain relief. I tried earlier rigid solutions, but found that they soon
frayed below the fix. My attempts with tape started out well, but eventually
the tape would slip and the heat shrink would slide down. The silicone tubing
has more "grab".

I think you are visualizing it correctly. Let's see if I can replicate it with
ASCII art (not to scale):

    
    
      ------------------------------ 
          ==========================******************
        =========================*********************  
      ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++*********O********
        =========================*********************
          ==========================******************
      ------------------------------  ****************
                                      ****************
    
      - layer of heat shrink -------   Rigid Connector
         = outer layer of silicone =******************
       = inner layer of silicone =********************
      + Thin frayed Apple cable ++++***color O led ***
       = inner layer of silicone =********************
         = outer layer of silicone =******************
      - layer of heat shrink -------  ****************
                                      ****************
     

It comes out looking quite nice. The rigidity of the tubing plus shrink wrap
isn't a problem if you plug in so that the rigid part is along the side of the
laptop. It actually provides a fairly nice handle for unplugging, since you
can get good leverage anywhere along the shrink wrapped portion.

------
f_allwein
So what are other trustworthy places to buy electronics? Seems like if you
don't buy at Apple or Amazon (without 3rd party sellers), there's no way of
knowing if an item is counterfeit. Which harms the market as they can charge
higher prices...

~~~
x0x0
amazon isn't trustworthy

They simply don't give a shit that it's virtually impossible to buy non-
counterfeit laptop chargers, phone chargers, batteries, or most electronics on
their site.

They also are alleged to, when you buy item X directly from amazon, ship you
item X from the closest warehouse both in their stock _and_ in fulfilled by
amazon stock. So who knows that the hell the provenance of the item you
receive is.

All of the above is fine for a book or a shirt, but not fine for power
electronics or food.

Though Apple sucks as well for gouging you on their ludicrously overpriced
chargers with their fragile yet non-replaceable output cables. If their
chargers weren't nearly $100 w/ tax and shipping this wouldn't be as big of a
problem.

~~~
f_allwein
Ironically, it's the same issues even with shirts:
[http://hypebeast.com/2015/7/fake-fashion-costs-the-
industry-...](http://hypebeast.com/2015/7/fake-fashion-costs-the-industry-
over-28-billion-usd-annually)

------
desdiv
Stopping counterfeit LV bags is hard because there's no authentication
mechanism short of putting RFID tags in each bag.

But a computer accessory is different. The magsafe charger communicates with
the laptop using the 1-wire protocol[0][1]. Why not incorporate an
authentication mechanism here?

[0] [http://hackaday.com/2013/06/07/apple-magsafe-protocol-
hackin...](http://hackaday.com/2013/06/07/apple-magsafe-protocol-hacking/)

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1-Wire](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1-Wire)

~~~
btrask
My counterfeit Dell charger (with 1Wire) just died after working great for 2
years (although yes, it was probably dangerous). Because of DRM I couldn't
attach the plug to a different power supply (as shown to me by an EE I trust).
Now I'm in the crappy situation of either rewarding Dell by buying a safe
adapter, or taking my business elsewhere with another counterfeit, which might
burn my house down.

Related: [http://hclxing.wordpress.com/2014/02/06/hacking-the-dell-
lap...](http://hclxing.wordpress.com/2014/02/06/hacking-the-dell-laptop-power-
adapter/)

------
Matt3o12_
Are there any MagSafe Chargers that are save and sold at a reasonable price
(or have a better durability then apple's)?

~~~
X-Istence
Apple's MagSafe chargers are absolutely fantastic from an electrical
engineering standpoint, where they tend to fall flat is on the
cables/connectors.

One of the things that has extended the life of my chargers is to be careful
when wrapping the wire around the two ears, leave a good bit of slack so that
you don't over tighten the charger wire.

This alone has solved most of my issues with my Apple MagSafe Chargers, and I
have one that I've had since 2007 that is still in full working condition.

~~~
rhinoceraptor
The rubber cable jacket on mine split open after 3 months of owning it. I
always wrap it very carefully, making sure not to strain it at the ends of the
cable. These things are truly defective by design.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Ironic: 'by design' is exactly right. There is no strain relief on Mac cables
because their art designers thought they were ugly. The art department wins
every fight at Apple. They're masters at making the sale. Just not so good on
delivering the goods.

------
chvid
Sadly Apple can prevent non-Apple peripherals from being sold most places in
the world. So we are stuck with their properietary lightning cables and
chargers. Which are expensive, have a limited number of designs and are often
of questionable quality (i.e. the white rubber insulation starts turning brown
and peeling off after about 6 months use).

Sure Chinese knockoffs bought by tourists in shady areas of Shenzhen or Hong
Kong are not good either but the point is that Apple's monopoly/non-standard
policies keeps a mature market from emerging.

~~~
chvid
Ok - maybe it was a little harsh - the apple chargers are clearly of better
quality than the Chinese copies. But man - I am tired of broken Apple cables
and I would really like to see some competition for price and quality here.

------
jhallenworld
Suppose a DJ using a counterfeit charger bought from a 3rd party seller
through Amazon burns down a nightclub, killing 100 people.

Who gets sued in this case? Everyone! At the very least: the DJ, the club
owner, the city, Apple, Amazon, 3rd party seller, maybe even UL if they are
not aggressively protecting their logo.

~~~
hackaflocka
What if it was a real Apple charger bought from Apple. And it ended up killing
100 people?

The Apple blogger army would be out in force defending Apple in that case.

What do you think? Would Apple be liable?

~~~
jhallenworld
Sure they are still liable. To minimize their liability, their design had
better be pretty damn good (close to safest possible).

I would argue that the Apple design also has to be close to the most reliable
possible design, since a high failure rate will will encourage people to buy
questionable aftermarket devices.

I would also argue that Apple should not try to make a high profit on safety
critical devices for the same reason.

------
ageofwant
Dave Jone's EEVBlog hosts a number of teardowns, here's a similar one from
2012:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wi-b9k-0KfE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wi-b9k-0KfE)

Good channel generally.

------
calebm
I bought a counterfeit Macbook charger a few years ago, and indeed, it did
damage my computer (I think it damaged some internal power system in the
Macbook. The effect was I could no longer run on battery power).

------
wodenokoto
What is the legality of these chargers? I thought the magsafe adapter was
patented and therefore 3rd parties can't built compatible plugs without a
license.

~~~
Animats
If you got a fake one, report it to Customs and Border Protection, along with
as much info as you have about the path by which it reached you. They seize
and destroy crap like this regularly.[1] Call 1-866-999-HALT, or see
"stopfakes.gov". Mention the forged UL symbol. Also report that to UL.[2]
Their report form accepts pictures.

UL puts effort into power supplies. This has been a problem with desktop
machines for years. Gamer sites which review power supplies note that UL-rated
power supplies don't burn out or blow up. That's because UL tests them by
loading them up to their specified output with a resistor bank and running
them for a few days at 100% load. They also test the overload-shutdown
features. There are many low-end desktop power supplies which will not deliver
their nameplate output continuously, or at all.

[1] [http://www.cnbc.com/2016/01/13/us-customs-seize-35k-in-
count...](http://www.cnbc.com/2016/01/13/us-customs-seize-35k-in-counterfeit-
wearable-tech.html) [2] [http://ul.com/customer-resources/market-surveillance-
departm...](http://ul.com/customer-resources/market-surveillance-
department/market-surveillance/)

~~~
wodenokoto
I got a third party charger in Europe. It doesn't have any apple logo, but is
otherwise a complete copy, design wise. It doesn't have any UL logo, though.

------
dessartc
I used one of these counterfeit chargers during 2 years then one day a flame
came out of it. That was the end of it too.

------
reiichiroh
I wonder if my knockoff MagSafe AC adapter from PrimeCables is safe. All their
Lightning stuff is MFI certified.

------
BreesusChrist
I love his teardown's. You always learn SO much.

------
hackaflocka
I just bought a pair of Nike Air Max 90 for $8 from China. Are you telling me
that's likely to be fake too?

Why the down votes?

------
EGreg
What makes this teardown so dangerous inside? And why would someone make a
counterfeit teardown... mostly to get notoriety?

~~~
asteli
Magsafe connectors aren't inherently safe - all the contacts are exposed,
creating a short-circuit and fire risk. Apple solves this by only supplying
power when the cable is plugged into a laptop. Counterfeit adapters don't
bother with the additional safety circuitry.

If you were to poke the MagSafe end of a counterfeit charger into a wad of
steel wool, you'd have a lot of sparks, and a good demonstration of why
they're dangerous.

As for why counterfeits exist... basic economics. Third party Magsafe adapters
don't exist, due to Apple's legal stranglehold on the concept of a
magnetically attached electrical cable. In a field void of competition,
unscrupulous electronics manufacturers see a huge upside, and here you see the
result.

------
artursapek
Amazon sold me one of these. It's a complete piece of shit. It lost
connectivity after a few months. I have been very frustrated with it. It works
only 10% of the time, seemingly at random.

In fact, it was just sitting by my apartment door because I was going to throw
it into the dumpster the next time I go outside. Here's some photos I just
took of it: [http://imgur.com/a/KaQZ3](http://imgur.com/a/KaQZ3). Notice the
exact same markings as in this article, and the poorly aligned components.
Cheap knock-off.

The killer part of this for me is that Amazon claims the product is "by
Apple"; this is the page I used to purchase it:
[http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00J3ZGEE4](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00J3ZGEE4).

Apple's apparent lack of control over their supply chain and brand, combined
with their degrading software quality, is making it almost a certainty that my
next computer will either be a Surface Pro or some kind of Linux ultrabook.

~~~
cynix
The product you linked to is sold by a 3rd party seller, not Amazon. This is
why I never buy from 3rd party sellers.

~~~
artursapek
You're right that the page says "Sold by Mayday Dealz and Fulfilled by
Amazon." I definitely missed that when purchasing, because the very top says

    
    
        Apple 45W MagSafe 2 Power Adapter for MacBook Air
        *by Apple*
    

Amazon probably allows this to be misleading, because I bet it increases
sales. Ideally they would make it a lot clearer when you're dealing with a
third party seller. I realize it only takes a moment to glance at the reviews
and see a red flag, but I don't remember them being so negative back when I
purchased it about a year ago.

~~~
tim333
Amazon do seem pretty tolerant of people selling fakes. I imagine it's because
it's easier to ignore than do something about but it probably hurts their
brand.

