Macbook's T2 Claims Another Victim, Apple Refuses To Honour Warranty

[captain_to_fire]

5 hours ago, Ja50n said:

There are plenty of great Hackintosh builds, though!

Many of them often experience kernel panic errors as far as I know and stuff like WiFi and Ethernet doesn't work on a Hackintosh.

[iamdarkyoshi]

2 hours ago, floofer said:

It’s a Mac with a T2 chip there’s nothing wrong with that. If you can afford one, you sure as hell can afford to backup your drive, and a case for that matter. 
 

Both are less than a tenth of the price of a MacBook. Guess what, Apple has iCloud storage, some free, you never even have to worry about updating your backup. 
 

If you’ve seriously gotten to the point where you’ve lost data because the drive in your computer crashes, or the logic board fails, this is 2019, it really is your own fault. 

While I totally agree that anyone without a backup (especially time machine since it actually works) is a moron, it doesn't address the fact that apple is locking out third party repair. Everyone should have a choice on where to bring their car for repairs, or repair it themselves. The same should apply to their computer.

[harryk]

1 hour ago, yolosnail said:

On a semi related note, I do find it amusing that everyone is wanting everything encrypted so the hackers can't steal their data, and don't want a backdoor for the government, but the same people cry when their data is lost because there is no way to recover their data when the hardware encryption fails

This. You either have 100% solid encryption or you don't.

 

39 minutes ago, iamdarkyoshi said:

While I totally agree that anyone without a backup (especially time machine since it actually works) is a moron, it doesn't address the fact that apple is locking out third party repair. Everyone should have a choice on where to bring their car for repairs, or repair it themselves. The same should apply to their computer.

I think Apple's (and the industry's) progression is to zero-repair products. If it breaks you replace it. There comes a point where the product is so complex or compactly made that paying someone a reasonable wage for the hours it takes to diagnose and repair just doesn't make economic sense. I'd argue that most smartphones have made it to this level and laptops are not far behind.

 

Perhaps what Apple should do is offer a salvage value for the remaining working components which the customer can apply to a new or refurbished machine. Then the broken machine is shipped to a facility where parts are refurbished or recycled in bulk. 

[Drak3]

8 hours ago, captain_to_fire said:

With macOS, it is bundled with programs you'll actually use and it's not trial software like iWork (Pages, Numbers, Keynote), iMovie and Garage Band. 

I use none of that garbage. I consider half of the programs that OSX ships with to be bloatware.

[Drak3]

1 hour ago, captain_to_fire said:

Many of them often experience kernel panic errors as far as I know and stuff like WiFi and Ethernet doesn't work on a Hackintosh.

Many more don’t now. Current hackintoshes probably experience as many kernal panics as Sierra and High Sierra did with the T2.

[Sauron]

It's kind of like losing the only key to your house and being unable to get in even with the help of a locksmith. It probably wouldn't be a huge deal if you could just disable it when the extra security isn't required, or if you could unlock it with your password.

8 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

I can't help but point out this is exactly the core point of the video.  People can whine all they want (and more often than not when it comes to Apple they don't even do that much) but ultimately all that matters at the end of the day is if they buy it or not, and if they do, there's no reason for Apple to change, and you have to accept whatever experience you get at that point because you went in fully informed and knew what you were getting.

I don't really agree with that, first of all not every customer is going to understand the implications and while they should inform themselves on what they're buying that doesn't mean it's acceptable to screw them over; secondly, in some situations there is no alternative. Third, even if there is an alternative that doesn't automatically mean that alternative is better and that still doesn't mean it's acceptable for Apple to screw over their customers.

 

There should be regulations in place to stop this (preferably by fixing copyright law and forcing Apple to provide the customer with the required resources to tackle this issue), the market does not and will not regulate itself. If they can screw you over they will and the direct competition will do nothing about it because they, too, profit from screwing you over. It's not a coincidence that most laptop and phone manufacturers are converging on increasingly integrated and monolithic devices that cannot be easily repaired. It's unfair to expect the customers to stand up and boycott these companies by giving up things that are almost essential to modern life - they aren't at fault here, the corporations are.

 

Now granted, if you can get a better alternative and were already screwed by Apple once and still choose to buy from them you aren't making a very good decision - that doesn't make it your fault that Apple screws people over.

 

I generally agree with Louis on what the issues with these devices are but I fundamentally disagree with him on what the solution is and who is to blame.

6 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

Everything Louis says in the last few minutes is entirely true, Apple customers have no one but themselves to blame. This sets a dangerous precedent for the future of Apple machines, and guess what, he told you so.

See above

[Sauron]

2 hours ago, yolosnail said:

On a semi related note, I do find it amusing that everyone is wanting everything encrypted so the hackers can't steal their data, and don't want a backdoor for the government, but the same people cry when their data is lost because there is no way to recover their data when the hardware encryption fails

Encryption is great when I have control over it. When Apple has that control and I don't, it's not. That's more like a mafia protection racket; you pay them to "protect" you but at any point they could just screw you over because they feel like it. Your data is held for ransom for pretty much no reason - there is no reason you couldn't just use a password or other methods you can directly influence and access even if the machine doesn't work anymore.

[vanished]

3 hours ago, yolosnail said:

On a semi related note, I do find it amusing that everyone is wanting everything encrypted so the hackers can't steal their data, and don't want a backdoor for the government, but the same people cry when their data is lost because there is no way to recover their data when the hardware encryption fails

I think you misunderstand this quite a bit, the issue here isn't encryption, it's a combination of encryption that you don't control and a non-removable device.  Having an encrypted drive is perfectly fine and desirable when you can do what you want with it.  When it's glued into a computer that fails and that computer is the only thing that knew the password, it's not so good.

 

4 hours ago, Sypran said:

My initial thoughts would be because a hard drive in your house is less likely to be stolen, then a laptop that frequents public places... and Apple doesn't want to deal with people who forgot or never wrote down whatever encryption key when they try to restore their data to a new Mac.

Probably all part of the frustration free environment Apple tries to create.

57 minutes ago, Sauron said:

It's kind of like losing the only key to your house and being unable to get in even with the help of a locksmith. It probably wouldn't be a huge deal if you could just disable it when the extra security isn't required, or if you could unlock it with your password.

I had considered that at the time but brushed it off, thinking that if you're concerned about theft you'd want to encrypt both, and if not, neither, to avoid at least a small part of the problem here, but I can see that side of it.

4 hours ago, Sypran said:

Probably all part of the frustration free environment Apple tries to create.

Well, except for this.  I think the evidence speaks pretty loud that regardless of any claims to the contrary they're going out of their way to create something very different than a "frustration free environment".

 

Quote

I don't really agree with that, first of all not every customer is going to understand the implications and while they should inform themselves on what they're buying that doesn't mean it's acceptable to screw them over;

I agree completely

Quote

secondly, in some situations there is no alternative.

I think a lot of the time (possibly all of the time but I can't really know) there is but the will is just not there to actually find it.

Quote

Third, even if there is an alternative that doesn't automatically mean that alternative is better and that still doesn't mean it's acceptable for Apple to screw over their customers.

True, depending what you mean by "better".  Everyone has priorities.  For me, avoiding a situation like this customer went though would be pretty high up, but I guess for some it's worth the risk.

Quote

There should be regulations in place to stop this (preferably by fixing copyright law and forcing Apple to provide the customer with the required resources to tackle this issue), the market does not and will not regulate itself. If they can screw you over they will and the direct competition will do nothing about it because they, too, profit from screwing you over. It's not a coincidence that most laptop and phone manufacturers are converging on increasingly integrated and monolithic devices that cannot be easily repaired. It's unfair to expect the customers to stand up and boycott these companies by giving up things that are almost essential to modern life - they aren't at fault here, the corporations are.

Yes, that would certainly help, but until that's added (and honestly regardless), there has to be some impetus on the part of the consumer to actually be discerning and have standards.  Going back to the above, you can't expect everyone will know or care, I talked about this in a status update on the issue before this topic was made, but when you actually do have all the facts and make the choice that their level of service is acceptable, then the blame really does shift.

Quote

Now granted, if you can get a better alternative and were already screwed by Apple once and still choose to buy from them you aren't making a very good decision - that doesn't make it your fault that Apple screws people over.

It's not your fault that Apple screws people over - at least not exclusively - but it does make it at least a large portion your fault that they screwed you over, since you walked into an environment that you knew it could happen in willingly, and with enough people doing this, collectively they are helping apple screw over everyone by telling them it's ok with their wallet.

 

[Sauron]

4 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

True, depending what you mean by "better".  Everyone has priorities.  For me, avoiding a situation like this customer went though would be pretty high up, but I guess for some it's worth the risk.

Yes, but I'm saying that hypothetically the alternatives could have the same problems - right now they don't, at least most of them, but that's not a very good ground to base a generic statement like "if you don't like what a company does just buy something else" on.

7 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

It's not your fault that Apple screws people over - at least not exclusively - but it does make it at least a large portion your fault that they screwed you over, since you walked into an environment that you knew it could happen in willingly, and with enough people doing this, collectively they are helping apple screw over everyone by telling them it's ok with their wallet.

Maybe so, but then you could make the same argument for grannies who fall for phone scams despite knowing they are a possibility. Yes, in some situations the victim could or should have known better and maybe could have avoided the issue, that doesn't make them any less of a victim. The logic is similar to saying a girl was "asking for it" by going around in provocative clothing late at night - while it may have been poor judgment on her part that doesn't justify or excuse what follows.

 

It shouldn't be possible for you to get screwed over like this, no matter how little thought you put into it.

14 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Yes, that would certainly help, but until that's added (and honestly regardless), there has to be some impetus on the part of the consumer to actually be discerning and have standards.

Obviously I'm not arguing against caution and customers taking the time to research this sort of stuff - that's always a good idea. What I'm saying is that we shouldn't blame the customers for this and let Apple off the hook by saying it's not their fault for doing what makes them money. I could make money by killing people as a hitman, that doesn't make it right.

[yolosnail]

16 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

I think you misunderstand this quite a bit, the issue here isn't encryption, it's a combination of encryption that you don't control and a non-removable device.  Having an encrypted drive is perfectly fine and desirable when you can do what you want with it.  When it's glued into a computer that fails and that computer is the only thing that knew the password, it's not so good.

 

That's why I said on a semi related note

[RejZoR]

Everyone jumping ont he Apple hate bandwagon and forgetting not being able to easily replace chips and do shit to system from security perspective is the whole point of it in the first place. Apple not resolving HW failures is another thing. But the point is T2 makes things so difficult because that's its very purpose.

[TetraSky]

When your warranty claim is refused... because some "genius" claim it has "water damage", which is easily disproved.
I'm guessing they were told by some manager/executive to refuse warranty on the newer models for whatever reason possible and push "responsibility" onto the customer, just because they don't want to accept the fact that it could possibly fail so soon, thus reducing the "failure rate".

 

I made the mistake of going to the Apple forum to see if anyone was talking about it..
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/250530964
 

As expected, they are blaming the user for not buying Apple Care+, for not taking it up to an AASP and 100% believing there's water damage even though there clearly isn't... all while saying that replacing the entire computer is "normal" instead of simply changing one part.... Wow. The Apple brainwashing is real.

[LAwLz]

What do people want exactly? This is how proper encryption should and does work. 

 

It's tied to hardware to protect against external attacks (removing the drive and breaking it on another computer) and it's not bsckdoored so it can't be recovered. 

 

This is actually how proper drive encryption works on Windows too. If you set up Bitlocker with TPM (like you should if you use it) then you can't recover it on another computer either. 

 

 

Not being able to recover the data is a byproduct of having proper and secure encryption, which is a good thing. 

[vanished]

2 hours ago, LAwLz said:

What do people want exactly? This is how proper encryption should and does work. 

 

It's tied to hardware to protect against external attacks (removing the drive and breaking it on another computer) and it's not bsckdoored so it can't be recovered. 

 

This is actually how proper drive encryption works on Windows too. If you set up Bitlocker with TPM (like you should if you use it) then you can't recover it on another computer either. 

 

 

Not being able to recover the data is a byproduct of having proper and secure encryption, which is a good thing. 

I would argue that if it needs this in order to be good - if it's possible to break it relatively easily on another machine - then it wasn't very good in the first place.  Genuinely good encryption should stand on its own.

 

2 hours ago, RejZoR said:

Everyone jumping ont he Apple hate bandwagon and forgetting not being able to easily replace chips and do shit to system from security perspective is the whole point of it in the first place. Apple not resolving HW failures is another thing. But the point is T2 makes things so difficult because that's its very purpose.

Yeah that is the purpose and that's why people are upset.  It's designed to be impossible to repair and in the process they've also put people's data at risk.  Yes encryption is good and should be offered, but there's no reason to sacrifice a user's ability to recover their own data in an attempt to keep others out (See above).  It should also be realized that for the majority of users (users who are not tech savvy), the risk to their data posed by their own incompetence is far greater than the risk posed to them by other factors.  They don't know the risk of a failure like this rendering it inaccessible.  For that reason I'd argue that it should be off by default in a design like this.

 

---

 

I think it's also important to remember the actual issue here - the reliability issues, the repairability, or lack thereof, how bad this is for the environment (and peoples' wallets) to just throw out machines all the time instead of offering basic repairs, and the fact they're ignoring a warranty that should definitely still be valid.  The data issue is just icing on the cake but it's nothing new, we saw this coming ages ago and I remember there being a post on that too.

[DrMacintosh]

I was just thinking about this, exactly what in Apples 1 Year warranty makes it so that a hardware fault is not covered under the warranty? Sounds illegal unless I'm missing something?

[jagdtigger]

Apple just keep on giving reasons to not buy them but some dumb ppl still do it. I have no sympathy towards them...

[iamdarkyoshi]

4 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

I was just thinking about this, exactly what in Apples 1 Year warranty makes it so that a hardware fault is not covered under the warranty? Sounds illegal unless I'm missing something?

They claimed that the machine was badly liquid damaged, which rossmann discovered was not the case. Presumably they [apple] lied to the customer to back out of a warranty repair and having to come up with an excuse for data loss

[DrMacintosh]

Just now, iamdarkyoshi said:

Presumably they [apple] lied to the customer to back out of a warranty repair and having to come up with an excuse for data loss

Sounds like a lawsuit

[iamdarkyoshi]

1 minute ago, DrMacintosh said:

Sounds like a lawsuit

I hope so... But its not the first time they used liquid damage as a false diagnosis

[DrMacintosh]

1 minute ago, iamdarkyoshi said:

I hope so... But its not the first time they used liquid damage as a false diagnosis

Like, how can they claim that there was water damage when all of their indicators of water damage did not activate? 

[aom]

1 hour ago, DrMacintosh said:

Like, how can they claim that there was water damage when all of their indicators of water damage did not activate? 

Would not be surprised if they just hoped that the customer would back down (being an average consumer who is not that tech savvy and trusts Apple geniuses) and not check for themselves or bring it elsewhere. Like most pp if presented this situation will just trust that Apple is telling the truth and doubt a third party would be able to fix it. Then they go to buy another macbook, blaming themselves for the mistake when it really wasn't. 

[LAwLz]

1 hour ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

I would argue that if it needs this in order to be good - if it's possible to break it relatively easily on another machine - then it wasn't very good in the first place.  Genuinely good encryption should stand on its own.

I don't think you understand the issue here and I suggest you look up TPM and how it's used in Windows and GNU/Linux computers. 

https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/129006/what-happens-when-a-tpm-chip-breaks-or-fails

 

 

No matter how good the encryption is, it will be limited by the strength of the password. 

Without TPM, or in this case the T2 chip, breaking most FDE is trivial with an offline dictionary attacks. By using a TPM you can enforce limiters to prevent those attacks (for example the default on TPM 2 lockout is, I believe, 2 hours).

 

Welcome to the world of proper encryption. If you for some reason lose the key, you're shit out of luck. That's the way it should be. 

 

But realistically, how often do these chips break? I bet it's not that often. Most SSDs actually do encryption these days and their controllers rarely break and I don't see any outcry about that. 

[RedRound2]

I will definitely agree that Apple should’ve repaired the laptop with faulty T2 chip, especially when it was under warranty. I hope this particular instance gets widespread enough that Apple compensates the said person and never repeat it again. Heck, maybe throw in a lawsuit for lying about the liquid damage.

 

While T2 definitely does seem to make things impossible to replace, I feel like it does more good than harm. Louis Rossmann only ever sees broken Macs, but the fact is, there are a lot of Macs out there in the wild running perfectly fine for years (except the butterfly keyboard). T2 security features, faster HEVC encoding, etc does bring in a noticeable improvement in many aspects of the machine. That’s said, I do hope Apple is internally working on improving its reliability with BridgeOS as it does seem to have brought in a lot of complications that never existed before in software. But I think with time, it should get solved

[vanished]

23 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I don't think you understand the issue here and I suggest you look up TPM and how it's used in Windows and GNU/Linux computers. 

https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/129006/what-happens-when-a-tpm-chip-breaks-or-fails

 

No matter how good the encryption is, it will be limited by the strength of the password. 

Without TPM, or in this case the T2 chip, breaking most FDE is trivial with an offline dictionary attacks. By using a TPM you can enforce limiters to prevent those attacks (for example the default on TPM 2 lockout is, I believe, 2 hours).

 

Welcome to the world of proper encryption. If you for some reason lose the key, you're shit out of luck. That's the way it should be. 

 

But realistically, how often do these chips break? I bet it's not that often. Most SSDs actually do encryption these days and their controllers rarely break and I don't see any outcry about that. 

I understand that PCs also have an equivalent of the T2 chip and losing it means losing the data, and that that's expected behaviour.  I understand that it's only ever as good as the password, and the encryption algorithm used.  I understand that without the password, it should be impossible to get in.

 

Perhaps I should clarify and reiterate my point: last I checked, there's encryption methods that don't rely on such a chip that would take even a super computer multiple heat deaths of the universe to brute force, thus making something like this unnecessary.  Are you saying this is not true and all modern encryption is basically pointless?

 

Specifically in regard to these machines, it's worse than a controller failing because even if that isn't dead, if there's some other issue with the machine that makes it inoperable, which seem to happen fairly often, you're still basically out of luck because the drive is soldered in and fed through that chip, so your data has to go through the machine.

 

I'll also reiterate that on top of and aside from all this, even if for the sake of argument we accept that this is a good and reasonable system for maximum security, I would argue that it's definitely not the ideal system for the majority of users.  If you require top tier security at the cost of having this risk, you can be glad the option exists, but to have it on by default for people who probably don't even realize it's there, why they should care, or that it means their data dies with the machine and who are used to the option of having it recovered seems like a very poor choice.

[NumLock21]

While Apple's T2 chip basically controls everything from your data to changing hardware, this is no different than a TPM module found on Windows PCs. It also does the same thing to your drives. When TPM is enabled user will have to setup a username and password, after data all data on the drives gets encrypted. If the TPM module dies, then all your data are lost because taking that drive to another computer to extract your data will not work, because it requires that TPM module.

This is also nothing more that Windows Bitlocker, which does the same thing, but at least with Bitlocker, you can access your data by entering the reset key it gives you, when you first setup the Bitlocker encryption.