Apple coughs up millions for technicians who shared explicit photos and a video of a 21-year-old iPhone owner

[Redaktion]

In 2016, a 21-year-old student sent an iPhone to Apple for repair, only for the technicians who repaired her device to share explicit photos and a video of her online. Five years on, Apple has agreed to pay her millions of dollars in damages.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-coughs-up-millions-for-technicians-who-shared-explicit-photos-and-a-video-of-a-21-year-old-iPhone-owner.544017.0.html

[kek]

So much for they so called "privacy" procedures.

[kakao]

I bet the phone was not protected by safe screenlock like passcode or biometry, and the technicians just had some fun. Not justifying what they did, just pointing that this is most likely not Apple's privacy issue but human error on both sides...

[A]

Don't people read the terms? When you get an Apple device, everything about you is now owned by Apple.

Encryption or not, this is why it is good to have removable storage. Because end of the day, with hardware access, all forms of security are pretty much pointless.

This is why I prefer in-home warranties where I can see everything upfront that a tech does. And removable storage where the most important data can be removed at any time.

[_MT_]

Encryption or not, this is why it is good to have removable storage. Because end of the day, with hardware access, all forms of security are pretty much pointless.

Not necessarily. But one has to remember that convenience and security often oppose each other. It is possible to create a scheme where a technician can't access your data or any stored credentials (which might not be on the removable storage at all). Sure, you can always attack the chip directly when you have access but there are defences against that to frustrate even sophisticated attacks and ordinary technicians don't have the skill or equipment. Removable storage is good for compliance. Otherwise, you just might have to destroy the device. The big question always is, do you trust the vendor? While such a scheme is possible, it's not trivial to verify it.

[vertigo]

This is just one of many reasons why it's extremely idiotic to solder storage to the motherboard. Aside from the fact it's ridiculous to replace the entire motherboard/CPU/RAM/etc just for a failed drive, if any component fails, there goes your storage, too, which is bad enough from a data-retention/protection perspective, but also very bad for data-security/privacy. I've simply eaten the cost before when I had a flash drive fail and they insisted I send it in for warranty replacement, which I wasn't willing to do. Another company understood this and allowed me to snap the drive in half and send a picture. Even with BitLocker or Apple's encryption, I'd be hesitant to send a drive in depending on the data on it, and would likely again just take the hit and buy another one. But that's not an option if it's soldered, at least not a realistic one.