So is Apple's anti-theft security a wonderful boon to users?

Or is it just another evil corporation strengthening it's monopoly power?

I had the misfortune of buying a 2018 Mac Mini on ebay a few days ago. Unfortunately, it had not been wiped, and it's security defaults had never been changed.

This essentially turns it into a very shiny paperweight.
And this is where everybody jumps to blame the victim. "But everybody knows you have to make sure the seller wipes the Mac."

My how the corporate overlords have trained us to be their apologists.
To be clear, I'm a software engineer. Part of my job is supporting Mac users. Where I work, people hold on to their computers for several years generally, and the T2 chips are only a couple of years old, so I hadn't run into this situation at work.
Of course, I'd read about them, but I was confident that whatever condition the computer arrived in, I'd likely be able to deal with it.

Unfortunately I hadn't read up enough to be an expert on their T2 chip and Activation lock.
The point is, I'm not an average user. I'm a very above average user. If I can find myself in this situation, almost anyone can.
It's not sufficient for the seller to wipe the mac. They have to do a number of iCloud-related steps to fully erase their identity from the mac. Thanks to the security chip, even a full erase and re-install doesn't do that.
If you don't do these steps, the new owner can not simply erase and reinstall the system. They can't boot into single user mode or boot from an external drive and wipe things that way.
Only a network reinstall, which verifies the iCloud status and requires an iCloud password will work to solve this problem.
So this leaves someone like me who has — entirely legally — purchased a used Apple computer stranded, with the only recourse to hope that I can explain to the seller what they now must do (which is now considerably more complicated) to get this system to be usable by me.
And frankly, the simplest option (which I do not advocate, but that many will use) is going to be to share their iCloud account and password with the buyer. This is of course a significant security hole.
Any security solution which encourages bad security practice is not in fact a security solution.
What they properly must do is to use one of their other Apple devices that they've logged into with the same iCloud account, and tell it to forget the device they've sold.

But there's a lot of assuming happening there.
Apple assumes that the seller owns other Apple devices. There's plenty of Macs for sale used that were bought by someone who wanted to try it, and didn't care for it, and so now they're selling it (and these people are among the most clueless).
Apple assumes that the seller knows the iCloud password. See the last tweet about clueless sellers. But also, laptops can legally come to you with no knowledge of the iCloud account that was used. Like an inherited computer for example.
Apple assumes that the seller gives a damn. Depending on the perfectly legal selling mode they used this may not be true.

Ah but the buyer should beware, right?
Really, imagine any other product, like a car, or a washing machine, or... ANYTHING where the buyer has to beware of the seller having a secret, permanent, unfixable lock that makes the product 100% unusable.
But it prevents theft right?

Maybe. We'll assume yes now for the sake of argument.

Great. Why does Apple care?
Like any corporation Apple only really cares about the bottom line. Does theft cost them money? Yes in theory some portion of stolen computer purchasers would otherwise buy a new computer.
But what if Apple could make ALL used selling of computers a pain the ass, not just stolen ones?

That'd be a MUCH bigger profit incentive for Apple than merely cracking down on stolen computers
And that's what's happened here. Let the buyer beware?

Any buyer who knows about this is going to be VERY worried about buying a used computer. Apple has effectively drastically reduced the used computer market for their computers.
https://t.co/0SIAdtuARJ
There is one other alternative to getting these old computers to work. It turns out that Apple has the ability to trivially reset them. You just have to bring it in to have it serviced.

Which costs money.

AND you have to have the ORIGINAL proof of purchase.
Again, this destroys the reseller market. But this particular loophole is even more sinister.
It turns out things can go wrong with the security chip. There are tales of people who've bought refurbished computers FROM APPLE, only to have a bug in the security chip fail on an update and make their computer unusable.
But because the purchaser did not have the ORIGINAL purchasing papers, Apple wouldn't reset these.
Hopefully that's an extreme example which is rare and which Apple has managed to address. But the knowledge that things like this are possible further dampens the market for used Macs.
It does however turn out that there is a way to hack the security chip in these Macs. It was discovered last fall.

This may provide me with recourse, because I have the expertise to do it (though it's unclear if I have the patience — I may just get my money back from ebay).
But you know who DOES have the patience to do something like this? Because they'll likely do it more than once?

People who steal computers.
So here's the final proof, the ultimate punch line. Computer theft rings are no longer stopped by this security. Only legitimate user-to-user reselling of computers remains as being substantially curtailed.
Of course, this was always the much larger chunk of their profit motive.
But it lays bare what Apple is doing. Your computer is no longer protected from theft. But it's going to be really hard to resell and lose a lot of value because of that. Which costs you money and makes Apple money.
Apple could reset any computer brought to them, no questions asked. If that sounds crazy to you, consider: has a car mechanic ever demanded you prove ownership before they'll fix your car?
Shouldn't it be insulting that their core assumption on every computer they see is to presume that it is stolen unless this can be otherwise proved?
And after all, if someone comes to them later on with proof of theft, Apple should still be able to find if this computer has been reused. This security lockdown doesn't add any real-world theft protection that they didn't already have with Find My Mac.
It just makes them harder to resell. Period.
I would love it if my Representative @RepKClark, and my Senators @SenWarren and @SenMarkey would read the above thread about corporate monopoly control.
I do want to clarify that the T2 chip does potentially add useful security mechanisms and protocols that are superior to previous technology.

It is Apple's administration of this new technology that is monopolist and outrageous.
Apple has the option to be much more lenient about resetting these systems, and it would have virtually no impact on Apple's ability discourage theft.

More from Tech

On Wednesday, The New York Times published a blockbuster report on the failures of Facebook’s management team during the past three years. It's.... not flattering, to say the least. Here are six follow-up questions that merit more investigation. 1/

1) During the past year, most of the anger at Facebook has been directed at Mark Zuckerberg. The question now is whether Sheryl Sandberg, the executive charged with solving Facebook’s hardest problems, has caused a few too many of her own. 2/
https://t.co/DTsc3g0hQf


2) One of the juiciest sentences in @nytimes’ piece involves a research group called Definers Public Affairs, which Facebook hired to look into the funding of the company’s opposition. What other tech company was paying Definers to smear Apple? 3/ https://t.co/DTsc3g0hQf


3) The leadership of the Democratic Party has, generally, supported Facebook over the years. But as public opinion turns against the company, prominent Democrats have started to turn, too. What will that relationship look like now? 4/

4) According to the @nytimes, Facebook worked to paint its critics as anti-Semitic, while simultaneously working to spread the idea that George Soros was supporting its critics—a classic tactic of anti-Semitic conspiracy theorists. What exactly were they trying to do there? 5/
I think about this a lot, both in IT and civil infrastructure. It looks so trivial to “fix” from the outside. In fact, it is incredibly draining to do the entirely crushing work of real policy changes internally. It’s harder than drafting a blank page of how the world should be.


I’m at a sort of career crisis point. In my job before, three people could contain the entire complexity of a nation-wide company’s IT infrastructure in their head.

Once you move above that mark, it becomes exponentially, far and away beyond anything I dreamed, more difficult.

And I look at candidates and know-everything’s who think it’s all so easy. Or, people who think we could burn it down with no losses and start over.

God I wish I lived in that world of triviality. In moments, I find myself regretting leaving that place of self-directed autonomy.

For ten years I knew I could build something and see results that same day. Now I’m adjusting to building something in my mind in one day, and it taking a year to do the due-diligence and edge cases and documentation and familiarization and roll-out.

That’s the hard work. It’s not technical. It’s not becoming a rockstar to peers.
These people look at me and just see another self-important idiot in Security who thinks they understand the system others live. Who thinks “bad” designs were made for no reason.
Who wasn’t there.
1. One of the best changes in recent years is the GOP abandoning libertarianism. Here's GOP Rep. Greg Steube: “I do think there is an appetite amongst Republicans, if the Dems wanted to try to break up Big Tech, I think there is support for that."

2. And @RepKenBuck, who offered a thoughtful Third Way report on antitrust law in 2020, weighed in quite reasonably on Biden antitrust frameworks.

3. I believe this change is sincere because it's so pervasive and beginning to result in real policy changes. Example: The North Dakota GOP is taking on Apple's app store.


4. And yet there's a problem. The GOP establishment is still pro-big tech. Trump, despite some of his instincts, appointed pro-monopoly antitrust enforcers. Antitrust chief Makan Delrahim helped big tech, and the antitrust case happened bc he was recused.

5. At the other sleepy antitrust agency, the Federal Trade Commission, Trump appointed commissioners
@FTCPhillips and @CSWilsonFTC are both pro-monopoly. Both voted *against* the antitrust case on FB. That case was 3-2, with a GOP Chair and 2 Dems teaming up against 2 Rs.

You May Also Like

#ஆதித்தியஹ்ருதயம் ஸ்தோத்திரம்
இது சூரிய குலத்தில் உதித்த இராமபிரானுக்கு தமிழ் முனிவர் அகத்தியர் உபதேசித்ததாக வால்மீகி இராமாயணத்தில் வருகிறது. ஆதித்ய ஹ்ருதயத்தைத் தினமும் ஓதினால் பெரும் பயன் பெறலாம் என மகான்களும் ஞானிகளும் காலம் காலமாகக் கூறி வருகின்றனர். ராம-ராவண யுத்தத்தை


தேவர்களுடன் சேர்ந்து பார்க்க வந்திருந்த அகத்தியர், அப்போது போரினால் களைத்து, கவலையுடன் காணப்பட்ட ராமபிரானை அணுகி, மனிதர்களிலேயே சிறந்தவனான ராமா போரில் எந்த மந்திரத்தைப் பாராயணம் செய்தால் எல்லா பகைவர்களையும் வெல்ல முடியுமோ அந்த ரகசிய மந்திரத்தை, வேதத்தில் சொல்லப்பட்டுள்ளதை உனக்கு

நான் உபதேசிக்கிறேன், கேள் என்று கூறி உபதேசித்தார். முதல் இரு சுலோகங்கள் சூழ்நிலையை விவரிக்கின்றன. மூன்றாவது சுலோகம் அகத்தியர் இராமபிரானை விளித்துக் கூறுவதாக அமைந்திருக்கிறது. நான்காவது சுலோகம் முதல் முப்பதாம் சுலோகம் வரை ஆதித்ய ஹ்ருதயம் என்னும் நூல். முப்பத்தி ஒன்றாம் சுலோகம்

இந்தத் துதியால் மகிழ்ந்த சூரியன் இராமனை வாழ்த்துவதைக் கூறுவதாக அமைந்திருக்கிறது.
ஐந்தாவது ஸ்லோகம்:
ஸர்வ மங்கள் மாங்கல்யம் ஸர்வ பாப ப்ரநாசனம்
சிந்தா சோக ப்ரசமனம் ஆயுர் வர்த்தனம் உத்தமம்
பொருள்: இந்த அதித்ய ஹ்ருதயம் என்ற துதி மங்களங்களில் சிறந்தது, பாவங்களையும் கவலைகளையும்


குழப்பங்களையும் நீக்குவது, வாழ்நாளை நீட்டிப்பது, மிகவும் சிறந்தது. இதயத்தில் வசிக்கும் பகவானுடைய அனுக்ரகத்தை அளிப்பதாகும்.
முழு ஸ்லோக லிங்க் பொருளுடன் இங்கே உள்ளது
https://t.co/Q3qm1TfPmk
சூரியன் உலக இயக்கத்திற்கு மிக முக்கியமானவர். சூரிய சக்தியால்தான் ஜீவராசிகள், பயிர்கள்