[HN Gopher] Why does iPhone 13 screen replacement disable Face ID
___________________________________________________________________
Why does iPhone 13 screen replacement disable Face ID
Author : judge2020
Score : 49 points
Date : 2021-10-02 19:16 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (icorrect.co.uk)
(TXT) w3m dump (icorrect.co.uk)
| whoknowswhat11 wrote:
| Just realize - if we let folks writing click bait headlines
| control us, the technically quality will (usually) go into the
| toilet. Site guidelines suggest not criticizing websites tech -
| but do click through on your iphone to experience the enlightened
| nature of current web design.
|
| I'm reminded of the anti-tracking articles on news sites LOADED
| with like 15 DIFFERENT trackers :)
|
| Separatly, isn't this an obvious security feature, especially
| with I thought in display touch or face ID coming?
|
| Though it's not clear why an apple authorized replacement would
| need to be distrusted, I'd imagine mostly third party shops would
| be on distrust list.
|
| Apple does need to fix their imessage security disaster though
| first.
| vbezhenar wrote:
| > Just realize - if we let folks writing click bait headlines
| control us, the technically quality will (usually) go into the
| toilet. Site guidelines suggest not criticizing websites tech -
| but do click through on your iphone to experience the
| enlightened nature of current web design.
|
| Actually I like this scroll on desktop with mouse. Now I want
| it in my browser as native, LoL.
|
| I agree that it's horrible on phone and probably horrible on
| macbook with touchpad scrolling.
| DaiPlusPlus wrote:
| Most browsers have a "Smooth scrolling" option. Have you
| tried toggling that?
|
| I use a desktop. With a very expensive and ergonomic mouse
| with a notched wheel (as opposed to a free-spinning wheel).
| One notch - Scroll 3 lines instantly. No delay. No lag. No
| animation. The way it should be.
| vbezhenar wrote:
| I found that feature in chrome://flags and enabled it. It
| did not make any effect. There are some extensions, but I
| don't really trust extensions so probably I won't use
| those.
|
| Scroll animation is what I liked on this website. My
| browser does not have any noticeable animation when I
| scroll, it just instantly moves page where I drag
| scrollbar.
| phantomread wrote:
| If you're on an i-device then reader view in safari (or other
| browsers) works well to get around the scrolling issue. Ditto for
| Android.
| judge2020 wrote:
| Here's an outline link since it has broken scrolling and seems to
| be loading slow https://outline.com/7p3F9U
|
| > Further forward to the present moment and the iPhone 13's
| screen IC now not only acts as a ADC, enables True Tone, carries
| a ROM for the non-genuine message but also now communicates with
| Face ID. We believe this communication with Face ID is a bug in
| iOS15. But it shows us a glimpse of how much more complex the
| screen IC is going to be in the future. We expect the next
| generations of iPhone to contain 2 biometrics in Face ID & in
| screen Touch ID.
| 1-6 wrote:
| Getting to the real question: How does this site override my
| iPhone's default kinetic scrolling speed?
| marcosscriven wrote:
| And why does whoever did that think it was a good idea?
| [deleted]
| MBCook wrote:
| Oh wow you aren't kidding. That's terrible. Why would anyone do
| that?
| kecupochren wrote:
| Usually devs primarily running Windows who want to have
| smooth scrolling. They often don't disable it for MacOS
| because they don't know it has its own thing.
|
| But why does a site aimed on Apple products has it is
| mindboggling
| [deleted]
| aaaaaaaaaaab wrote:
| >Why would anyone do that?
|
| This is a question that can be asked about 9 out of 10 web
| "technologies".
| gambiting wrote:
| It's broken on Android as well in Chrome. It's horrendous.
| Just....why. Leave the default scroll as-is.
| echelon wrote:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
|
| > Please don't complain about website formatting, back-button
| breakage, and similar annoyances. They're too common to be
| interesting. Exception: when the author is present. Then
| friendly feedback might be helpful.
| imwillofficial wrote:
| I believe this doesn't apply, because the complaint, and
| subsequent explanation isn't common, and was interesting.
| echelon wrote:
| 11 out of 13 of the comments on this post are about the
| scrolling behavior rather than the substantive content of
| the article.
|
| I'd say this is a problem.
| detaro wrote:
| broken scrolling is absolutely a common complaint. (maybe
| slightly less so today since devs have started to learn to
| not do it)
| lol768 wrote:
| They have some custom JS which hijacks the scroll event and
| manually applies a "transform: translate3d" CSS rule with its
| own linear interpretation / velocity / acceleration logic..
| 1-6 wrote:
| That could really trip someone. It may be even possible to
| reverse the scroll! I'm surprised that Apple doesn't block
| this behavior.
| sneak wrote:
| The Apple Inc quest to generate and endlessly increase services
| revenue is the literal cancer that is killing Apple's former 30+
| year obsession with customer delight.
|
| A brand new $1500 iPhone Pro will try to hustle you with ads for
| $2/mo or something for cloud storage upgrades.
|
| It it's not just cloud, too, but also repair, and 10x industry
| standard charges for CC processing in the App Store, and now the
| credit card, and more iCloud and TV and arcade subscription plans
| and options.
|
| It's super gross and lame.
| sedatk wrote:
| I stopped reading the article because scroll hijacking made it
| unbearable.
| ObamaBinSpying wrote:
| I stopped ready at "504 Gateway Time-out"
| xondono wrote:
| A lot of people are claiming this is about screwing with third
| party, but there's a lot of good technical reasons to do things
| like that.
|
| For instance, the serialization of batteries (they're not only
| serialized, they have a symmetric key pair) is a key safety
| feature.
|
| I've designed devices with the same ICs and screwing up the
| configuration (or copy pasting the config and install cells with
| different chemistry) can set them on fire.
|
| In the case of the screen, I think it's much of a security issue.
| josephcsible wrote:
| Under what circumstances exactly would it be a safety or
| security issue to replace one genuine OEM part with another
| genuine OEM part, identical in all ways except for the serial
| number?
| theranger wrote:
| It would not be a safety issue indeed only until the
| replacement part includes some mitm hardware that tampers the
| face id authentication flow. And this can be planted into the
| genuine looking replacement part as well.
| josephcsible wrote:
| I expect that at least one of these things would have to be
| true:
|
| 1. The MITM hardware could be installed into the screen
| that's already paired with the iPhone, so the serial check
| wouldn't help
|
| 2. The MITM hardware would make the screen look non-genuine
| regardless of serial, so the serial check wouldn't be
| needed
| loopback_device wrote:
| Perhaps to prevent (or at least make it harder for) someone
| shorting around the security it is supposed to provide, i.e.
| by emulating or modifying the replacement part - not that
| that'd really stop the determined ones
| Zak wrote:
| It's a safety issue to replace some, but not all of the cells
| in a Li-ion battery with cells that are not the same age and
| condition. Since smartphone batteries are almost always a
| single cell, it's a non-issue.
|
| Another scenario I can imagine is a charge controller
| reducing the maximum charging current as the battery ages
| based on information stored in the controller's memory, which
| would be incorrect if the cell is replaced. Of course, it
| would be unusual to replace a cell with one in worse
| condition, so it would also be surprising for that to be a
| safety concern.
| gambiting wrote:
| Keep in mind that the check done inside an iPhone doesn't
| prevent the failure mode you describe. After all the phone
| only checks the microcontroller attached to the battery,
| not the actual cells(if that's even possible in any way).
| Zak wrote:
| > _not the actual cells(if that 's even possible in any
| way)._
|
| It isn't, but there are some controller circuits that
| switch off permanently if the voltage falls out of range,
| making changing cells more difficult.
| xondono wrote:
| It wouldn't, OEM batteries can be swapped with no issues,
| it's non-genuine parts what causes issues.
| l4yao wrote:
| On iPhone 12 and moreso on 13, many genuine OEM parts
| cannot be swapped by anyone other than those authorized by
| Apple.
| xondono wrote:
| AFAIK, that's only the case for the screen, and there's a
| warning when swapping the rear camera.
| Zak wrote:
| > _In the case of the screen, I think it's much of a security
| issue._
|
| I default to skepticism on this sort of explanation, especially
| when it involves Apple and third-party repair.
|
| Of course, it might be possible to devise a very sophisticated
| attack using the screen's hardware interface and Face ID as a
| vector. If the iPhone was a security-hardened specialty device,
| I might find that to be a valid reason. It isn't; it's a
| consumer device, and one that's not terribly hard for
| sophisticated attackers to compromise, e.g.
| https://www.wired.com/story/apple-imessage-zero-click-hacks/
| gpt5 wrote:
| The iPhone is one of the most desirable attack target in the
| world. An attack that can access locked phones is extremely
| valuable. From the police to spy agencies to totalitarian
| regimes, everyone would buy your stuff. See NSO.
| fsckboy wrote:
| if you absolutely don't want your iPhone broken into, don't
| use FaceID at all; this case of "disables FaceID" in that
| case would be your best friend.
| baybal2 wrote:
| > For instance, the serialization of batteries (they're not
| only serialized, they have a symmetric key pair) is a key
| safety feature.
|
| Unless Apple itself wasn't opting for crap battery suppliers
| zython wrote:
| I can see how this can be a safety issue but IIRC even with
| genuine apple parts faceID stops working :/
|
| so this only concerns 3rd party repair shops or individuals who
| dont want to pay apple to replace their screen.
| wil421 wrote:
| Unless the iPhone 13 is different FaceID does work with
| genuine Apple parts. My wife and I have cracked lots of them.
| If Apple doesn't have them in stock yet because it's a new
| phone they will replace the phone. I've done it with and
| without AppleCare.
| kolbusa wrote:
| And to add the insult to the injury, the genuine parts are
| not available, which screws 3rd party repair shops even more.
| MichaelZuo wrote:
| Surely that's just a temporary thing as production lines
| fill their launch orders? I imagine the authorized
| repairers already have stock coming in Oct./Nov.
| kolbusa wrote:
| Authorized repairers often don't do repairs on component
| level, and sometimes ship your device to some place else
| to have the whole assembly replaced. Which is always much
| more expensive.
| gambiting wrote:
| The point is that you shouldn't need to be an authorized
| repairer to purchase a replacement screen from Apple. I
| don't need to be an official Volvo dealership to purchase
| any replacement part for my Volvo, as long as I know the
| part number I can easily buy the OEM part or a
| replacement and Volvo has no way to stop me.
| kitsunesoba wrote:
| It also makes it more difficult for thieves to part out stolen
| devices to work around activation locks, and so in theory is a
| theft deterrent.
| Nullabillity wrote:
| You know what else would lessen the demand for stolen donor
| devices? Actually selling the parts.
| vadfa wrote:
| You can't compete with the price of a stolen part.
| kitsunesoba wrote:
| Exactly. Serialization, which enables tracking and
| blocking of parts from stolen devices, works best
| alongside making OEM parts readily available at-cost to
| third party repair services.
| asiachick wrote:
| > In the case of the screen, I think it's much of a security
| issue.
|
| logic only a fanboy would dream up. I'm sure the same excuse
| would be given by fanboys if apple shipped a car and somehow
| managed to make the windows unreplaceable except by specially
| signed apple glass.
| donmcronald wrote:
| > For instance, the serialization of batteries (they're not
| only serialized, they have a symmetric key pair) is a key
| safety feature.
|
| That's the messaging from the manufacturers which is a big lie
| IMO. You can validate keys or signatures and give a warning for
| non-genuine parts. The only reasons to disable features are to
| prevent competition and, ultimately, to cheat the customer.
| xondono wrote:
| It's not.
|
| Modern batteries integrate the charge controller with the
| cells, this allows to track the cell life and it allows the
| management of the chemistry.
|
| Even small changes in chemistry require modifications in the
| charging algorithm. The only real solution for managing that
| is bundling the algorithm with the cells.
|
| Setting the wrong configuration can definitely blow the cell
| up, or cause swelling.
|
| Source: I did blow some cells while designing a battery pack
| for a portable device
| userbinator wrote:
| Sorry, but that is complete corporate-profit-driven-
| paranoia BS.
|
| Lithium-ion cells are one of the easiest to charge -
| there's minimum and maximum voltages, and a maximum charge
| current. Simply limit charge current to the maximum until
| the cell reaches its maximum voltage, and then wait for the
| current to drop until it's nearly 0.
|
| Of course, exceeding those limits at the upper end
| certainly can result in flames, but it's seriously not that
| hard to charge a cell. But people like to spew plenty of
| FUD about "complex algorithms" and the like, because the
| companies who make the ICs stand to profit from that.
|
| Source: I have also worked in electronics on battery-
| powered devices.
| aaronbeekay wrote:
| Yes, it's true that you can implement a pretty simple
| generic lithium-ion cell charging algorithm that will get
| the job done for most cells. But that's not a "modern
| battery pack". If you're trying to eke hundreds or
| thousands of charge cycles out of cells, implement fast
| charging, do accurate state of charge estimation under
| load and in variable thermal conditions --- those things
| are very difficult to implement generically, and often do
| have parameters that depend on the specific chemistry
| being used. Modern devices have to do all of those
| things.
|
| Yes, TI makes money when people use their battery
| management ICs with fancy cell monitoring, but I don't
| see a lack of price pressure on those ICs. If
| manufacturers could implement the same features with a
| less complex, less expensive design, why would all of the
| modern battery systems, even in competitive sectors like
| consumer/retail electronics, integrate battery monitoring
| with the cells?
| fantyoon wrote:
| You used to be able to replace batteries in smartphones.
| Back then none of these things were issues. Its hard to
| imagine why they would be now.
| grayhatter wrote:
| Oh I absolutely think the primary reason for this is an amoral
| technical reason (please note I said amoral not immoral). But I
| also think given Apple's aggressive history of trying to fuck
| with 3rd parties. It would be naive to think that wasn't an
| important factor in this design decision. Even with the most
| charitable interpretation, someone knew that this would fuck
| with third parties, and instead of trying to avoid it. They're
| going with the solution, again with the most charitable
| interpretation, appears to look like they're obstructing 3rd
| party repair.
|
| I pretend to be a security expert on TV; and I fully support
| the decision to disable face id when there might be a hardware
| mitm attack. But there's options available to Apple that allow
| you to have security and 3rd party support.
|
| But they're clearly still making decisions that obviously
| obstruct user choice. And it's dishonest to pretend otherwise.
|
| ps. I don't think you're being dishonest, you're clearly
| explaining the rational. My issue generally is the apologists
| who use these arguments without context, and pretend there's no
| other options.
| irae wrote:
| What I am about to say has nothing to do with endorsing Apples
| decisions. But people in developed countries tend to miss what
| happen in less favorable places. Two major problems: Robbery and
| used iPhone scams.
|
| Where I live, I often decide to leave my 12 mini at home because
| I don't want to be robbed. If I take it, I cannot take it out of
| my pocket until my destination.
|
| They steal you, if you are lucky that's it. If you are unlucky
| they hold you at guns point or knifes edge until you remove your
| iCloud account. Cops can't do much, as they use minors to do the
| robbery and police can't enter the places they disassemble the
| iPhones, not even if your FindMy is pointing exactly where it is.
| Minors caught are released after about 12h of being held and are
| found doing the same thing next day.
|
| When you want to sell/buy used iPhone, you might also be at risk.
| You can be robbed trying to sell and you can buy a completely
| remix of a phone from scrapped parts and non original parts that
| put together can barely work. People repairing sometimes never
| had formal training, and it could affect safety.
|
| I wonder if Apple considers this at all. It would be naive to
| think any of what Apple is doing is intended at developing
| countries safety, but I can't stop thinking the warnings about
| non-legitimate parts would maybe help people buying second hand,
| and there is a very small hope in me that it become less
| lucrative to steal phones in the future.
| LorenPechtel wrote:
| It sounds like they are talking about third parties making such a
| change, not an official Apple repair.
|
| You don't trust hardware that a bad guy got their hands on.
| Picture a black-hat iPhone repair shop, they're installing
| replacement screens that appear legit but aren't--now they can
| defeat the face ID and get into your locked phone.
|
| Low probability? What if it's a government doing it? Seem more
| likely?
| Nextgrid wrote:
| A government can just use legislation and threats of punishment
| to compel the owner to unlock the device. This is already
| happening in the US.
| sudosysgen wrote:
| A government or black hat could just buy one of the plethora of
| exploits and hack any iPhone whenever they want for cheaper
| than setting up chains of repair stores.
| nikanj wrote:
| Why use native scrolling with 0MB used when you can implement
| your own scrolling in JS for mere tens of megabytes?
| deathanatos wrote:
| ... and now the site is down, too...
|
| (...and now that I'm reading a cached version... does it
| actually answer the question in the title?)
| aemreunal wrote:
| Clearly because you can't make scrolling horrible without some
| JS in there.
| martini333 wrote:
| What a mess of an article and website.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-10-02 23:01 UTC)