
Apple is lobbying Californian lawmakers against 'Right to Repair' bill - rhokstar
https://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/3074896/apple-is-lobbying-californian-lawmakers-against-the-right-to-repair
======
benmarks
> _" With access to proprietary guides and tools, hackers can more easily
> circumvent security protections, harming not only the product owner but also
> everyone who shares their network"_

Of the many consumer insults present in this entire topic, this one really
shows the ridiculousness of Apple's position.

~~~
tombert
For that matter, if more altruistic people had access to these tools, couldn't
you argue that security bugs would be found quicker as well? As of right now,
it's possible that there are a million security bugs that black-hat hackers
are sitting on that the average person doesn't have the tools to know about.

Isn't security-through-obscurity considered the worst kind of security?

~~~
henryackerman
Security-through-obscurity can be very effective by using it to throw up a
smoke screen.

Case: you need to protect a web server. If you can successfully hide/spoof
your OS/software fingerprint, an attacker won't know whether your server has
vulnerable software. This makes exploit selection extremely difficult.

You can protect an already secure system from 0-day or unknown exploits by
hiding whether you're running windows/linux/bsd/whatever with
IIS/apache/nginx/traefik/caddy.

Of course this should not be used as an argument to introduce laws that limit
the rights of repair shops, users or even security researchers.

~~~
dvfjsdhgfv
Really? Software detection techniques are so sophisticated these days, you
need to put a lot of effort into that, and it all can be defeated by something
very simple that doesn't even depend on you. Experts will find the way and
newbies will just throw at you everything they have.

------
ekianjo
> "When an electronic product breaks, consumers have a variety of repair
> options, including using an OEM's [original equipment manufacturer]
> authorized repair network."

Yeah, it's called taxing users for the defects you engineered in the first
place. Look at how ridiculous the glued keyboard fiasco was with Apple, which
refused to admit any guilt in their design for several years and charged users
several hundred bucks for official repairs if they did not subscribe any
special warranty.

------
benologist
If there was a right to repair and Apple released three generations of bad
laptops someone else could probably fix their mistake while they were still in
the denial phase.

------
brensmith
Ugh! As a former Apple fanboi, _this_ is the reason I no longer own any Apple
equipment. Apple products are beautiful, and very well designed, but so is a
rhinestone straitjacket.

------
wayneftw
I'd also like to see a "right to install" bill that targets all major
computing device platforms.

Nobody should be able to sell devices to millions of people without giving
those customers the ability to install their own software. There should be no
arbitrary limits such as "you have to plug your device into another device
every 7 days just to keep your custom software installed".

------
Simulacra
I agree and disagree. I think people should have the absolute right to repair
and modify their devices, with or without an existing warranty. However to
support that activity while forcing companies to honor the warranty feels
wrong. It's like saying here, I screwed it up, now you fix it for free.

------
sigzero
Let them repair but it should void any warranty.

~~~
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC
Why exactly should a vendor not be responsible for the quality of its product
just because they weren't hired to repair it?

~~~
mfatica
Why should a vendor be responsible for any damages caused by unauthorized
repairs using unknown methods and equipment?

~~~
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC
1\. Who is talking about unauthorized repairs? I am talking about repairs that
are authorized, by the owner of the product, because who else would possibly
have the authority to decide who is allowed to do something with a thing, such
as repairing it, if not the owner of that thing?

2\. Who says the vendor should be responsible for damages caused by repairs
not done by the vendor? I was responding to someone who said that a repair not
done by the vendor should void the warranty. Warranty only covers defects
caused by the vendor, thus what they suggested was that vendors should not be
liable for defects they themselves caused if someone else has repaired their
product.

------
natch
The tradeoff here is between right to repair, and users having secure,
trustworthy devices that will not spy on them. Put yourself in the shoes of an
abused family member who lives with a hardware tinkerer who can pwn your
device, unbeknownst to you, enabling further abuse (not talking about physical
abuse necessarily here).

Just to take one slice of the population as an example, Apple has many gay and
trans employees and no doubt users as well, so they are keenly aware of the
problems these people can face whether while growing up, or afterwards.

As another example, take a look at the /r/atheism subreddit FAQ about coming
out to your family, and read some of the horror stories there. People get
disowned, kicked out of their parents homes, physically threatened, and even
physically harmed in some cases, just for thinking for themselves.

As another example, in some cultures, honor killings are also a thing.

Users deserve to have their personal devices be secure, even from hostile
family or household members.

On the other side is right to repair. I would love to see both sides be
satisfied, but I do think the right to repair folks have been too militant in
ignoring and dismissing the legitimate concerns Apple has about preserving
user privacy.

Then there is the bogus line of argument that Apple is only against right to
repair because they are heartless, greedy, profit fiends. But there are plenty
of profit opportunities they have forgone, such as gathering personal data to
exploit for ad networks, which argue otherwise. So I don't buy it.

~~~
quakeguy
Sorry, but what do you want to say with your comment? Changing a broken screen
does not invalidate any chips on the motherboard afaik..

~~~
natch
I think my comment is pretty clear.

Just to address your one cherry-picked hardware item:

>Changing a broken screen does not invalidate any chips on the motherboard
afaik..

On some devices (those with fingerprint sensors) there are security
implications.

~~~
quakeguy
From My experience with iPhones the opposite is true.

