Macs with T2, M1 chips cannot be restored to factory state without Apple | Hacker News Reader

Macs with T2, M1 chips cannot be restored to factory state without Apple

sneak.berlin

114 pointssharjeelsayed93 comments

The key words missing from the title is "without _connection to_ apple". From the original title I assumed that you had to take it to the apple store to reset it or something.

Which is good from the aspect that if your device is stolen or lost, the finder/thief just can't factory reset it and use it.

Which is exactly why they do it.

Actual customers that buy lots of Apple products and have appreciated how every year iPhones get more and more pointless to steal have been asking for the same for their laptops for years.

Well, one could solve that just as well with a device that is fully open to the owner and still pointless to steal. By handing out a per-device master reset key that the owner doesn't need for regular operation and thus doesn't have with the device when and where someone might want to steal it.

That wouldn’t work for quite a few users. They would lose the reset key and be locked out of their hardware.

I think Apple should offer users the option, though, just as they for account recovery (https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208072. I’m not sure that works without _also_ going to Apple’s servers)

I don't see why the key couldn't optionally be stored with Apple, or even by default. But it should be possible/easy to manage your key yourself if you want.

If you don't have to use them regularly then people will misplace them.

Apple can still offer an internet based factory reset in addition to the offline factory reset.

They could, but open source has a poor track record of making an easy solution for something this comprehensive that a regular user can set up.

That makes sense if Activation Lock is turned on. But you should be able to turn it off if you need a fully offline machine.

You never needed apple for that. My laptop can't just be 'factory reset' because the thief would have to flash the bios. without that something as simple as secureboot will prevent reinstalling a different OS.

How is that good? Nearly all other non-electronic products behave based on the fact that the one in physical possession of it is the owner, and that is a notion which has lasted for literally millenia.

Make no mistake, this is simply Apple's attempt to gain complete control over its users.

> Make no mistake, this is simply Apple's attempt to gain complete control over its users.

This is unfair and just not true.

It is known that apple products can be rendered useless after being stolen easily by the original owner. Yes, they still get stolen, but it is a really nice feature that you can wipe the data remotely and mark the device as lost / stolen. You also know the thief will mostly be stuck with a low-value device that is all but useless without some sort of jailbreak or scam to resell it.

Of course, this feature has tradeoffs, and some of them are negative for some people (like the OP sneak). Maybe it helps Apple "gain complete control" over users, but you are gonna need more evidence to support that claim.

To completely ignore the positive aspects is not contributing anything at all w/ these sorts of discussion.

> You also know the thief will mostly be stuck with a low-value device that is all but useless without some sort of jailbreak or scam to resell it.

(1) Jailbreak is a feature for many who consider it a way to free their iDevices from Apples's iron clutches.

(2) And I used to think too that remote locking the device makes it less viable for thieves. Turns out that's a fallacy because they are doing what some automobile theives do now - strip it and sell the parts. (And thanks to Apple's exorbitant prices for its parts and suing most "unauthorized" sellers / suppliers, that's a lucrative market too.)

Maybe it helps Apple "gain complete control" over users, but you are gonna need more evidence to support that claim.

The claims made in the article and their long history of locking down their systems against the user and fighting right-to-repair aren't enough evidence? Apple wants you to consume when they tell you to, and if you don't they can simply brick your hardware and leave you SOL.

my point was that its not that simple, and you sound like a zealot. Apple's main focus has always been about creating an amazing experience for humans via Apple computers and devices. Thats it. The hardware is secondary and the expandability is secondary. How that has played has changed over time and depending on the context (ex: the original Mac Pro or even the first Macs), but allowing someone to add all the ram and storage has never been at the forefront of apple's vision.

There are clearly billions of people who are okay with giving up 'control' over their devices and data, whether its apple or amazon or google. I know my windows machine nags me every time I restart to phone home to MS and setup some account, and that's not even a reinstall. My android device asks for a google login at like step 3 of the setup process. Sure, I can bypass it, cuz I don't care and they aren't my primary machines, but most people will not.

Most people don't care if their laptop or phone phones home when it needs to be reset, as long as it works and makes them happy. Most people (I would guess 99%+) don't repair their devices beyond fixing a cracked screen or maybe adding RAM or a new GPU to a prebuilt gaming PC. How many folks can even dismantle and work on a modern phone with any success, whether Android or iOS?

Some people think about privacy and ads and surveillance wrt technology. I know I do. I see that Apple does things that can serve multiple interests at the same time, and it isn't so black and white:

* they want to sell a shit load of services and hardware and continue to make crazy amounts of money

* they see that privacy is slowly (but surely) becoming a thing people want, especially those w/ the dollars and more tech savvy. So they are focusing on privacy with their products, and that is real. No matter how much apple haters love to call out counter examples, they are making a real effort - look at Siri and iMessage and Apple Maps.

* they also want do deliver an amazing experience to people - I know I don't need to explain how security and user experience are often in conflict.

Ignoring all these factors at play here is missing the bigger picture.

What control am I really losing here? There isn’t a way to implement this specific security measure without a remote service, so Apple provides the remote service. I get the security feature.

Other HN commenters have said that an optional offline factory reset is possible by providing a device specific password/master key. The fact that Apple only provides internet based recovery means they don't care about user control.

Try getting a car key replaced sometime. Both my car key and my wife’s were in the same bag when they fell out of a capsized canoe and sunk. Not fun nor cheap.

I don’t like it, but the market wants crap like this.

Or, the market pushback isn't loud enough. (Or financially significant)

apple is a cell phone company now. in the same way that users in the US hate Verizon, ATT etc for rubbing our noses in the fact that we have no choice but to use their service, which frees them up to treat us, the customer, like trash, that’s how anyone paying attention and being honest with themselves now feels about apple. there’s not a sliver of sunlight of a difference between these corporations, and in fact, they enable one another. I wish this weren’t the case, and even if apple didn’t have sycophants populating 80% of this message board it wouldn’t matter. they are beyond having to give a crap about users, technically inclined or otherwise, at this point.

I mean, that sucks, but surely getting your car stolen sucks considerably more, right?

How much less likely do these technologies have to make theft before the hassle to actual owners isn’t worth it?

It does — as does getting mugged for your $1200 phone!

I don't not agree with your sentiment, but responding with "How is that good?" to “the finder/thief just can't factory reset it and use it” seems like you’re not actually responding to what they said.

Containers with locks have existed for a very long time.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking from the title too. I guess it's because of the activation lock feature, no different than a iPhone or iPad.

Unpopular opinion but I like that if someone steals my MacBook, it’s impossible for them to factory reset it unless they get a BootROM exploit or even use it if they don’t have an early boot exploit. If there’s a way to “turn this off” then thieves would be able to use that mechanism to bypass the activation lock. If you want 100% total control, then don’t buy Apple.

There has been something in place that can achieve this for a while. I had a MacBook Air stolen in 2014, and got it back a few months later with everything intact. I had a BIOS (or whatever the Mac equivalent is) password set, so without some serious work (more than the average thief) it was impossible to reset the machine. I also had the disk encrypted, so even if they managed to bypass that they wouldn't be able to access my data.

  >I had a BIOS (or whatever the Mac equivalent is) password set,

I think you're referring to the Open Firmware Password, which can be set to prevent the computer booting from an external drive or booting from a swapped internal drive, without first entering this password

"Open Firmware" is from the PowerPC Mac era ;)

You could be right. It seems they've dropped the 'Open' and it's just called 'Firmware Password' nowadays:

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204455

Maybe I'm misunderstanding but I don't think that is the case? This article seems to be saying you can factory reset a Mac, but you have to have an internet connection so Apple can activate it.

In theory Apple could let people tell them when devices have been stolen and then remotely brick them. But I've never heard of that and I doubt they would ever do that for the same reasons mobile phone operators don't do it, even though the capability is available.

They do have a feature where you can prevent a stolen Mac (or iOS device) from being activated. It’s called Activation Lock, and it’s turned on automatically when you enable Apple’s Find My Mac service.

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208987

My new unethical service is cracking "locked" Macbooks with the T2 chip using Checkm8. I am being paid 100$ per unlock by some people who I do not care where they bring the Macs from. I am not sure if the security chips are a solution as long as there is some sort of security hole to break them. Now if they had a BIOS that only started with the recognition of the owner's fingertip on the other hand...

I find it pretty amusing that your last post was advocating for why we should hire you :D

Still, a modicum of respect for being upfront about it. And it shows they at least still consider the ethics of their actions, as opposed to turning a blind eye to it.

Whenever apple decides to shutdown the service that activates this hardware, many of these wiped computers will no longer be operational which won’t be great for future retro computer collectors and computer historians. Lots of ppl still run their Commodore 64, amigas, and even original Macs. JCS is even doing a whole video series on programming on the original Mac.

It doesn't even have to be old enough to qualify as "retro"; it gives Apple enough power to basically remotely kill off its products at any time. They are already hostile enough to right-to-repair and third-party replacements as it is.

Yea I agree, retro is a subjective term. Just meant in the context of computer collectors. A lot of apples latest computers lack the “collectibility” factor, they feel like total junk scrap in 10 years. Which is especially interesting because they usually do such a good job of making their new computers seem like holy grail immaculate gems. I distinctly remember the first intel MacBooks looking very high end and high tech, now they look like total garbage.

This is the real story here.

There's already tons of instances of devices becoming worthless because some remote service coming to an end. (Like all remote services eventually must).

There should be more regulations around this

>Commodore 64

Yes two years ago i was visiting a wood-workshop, the cnc machine was powered by a C64 in production since 30 years, just the power-brick had to be exchanged 2 times ;)

By the time Apple decides to shut it down (this would be like the end of the Mac era completely) there should be enough jailbreaks and hardware exploits to make the machines usable again.

At this time, I feel a 100% offline, airgapped environment is something of a niche. The way Apple has things set up, likely work better for the average consumer.

Apple is omakase, not a la crate. They have made decisions that they think are best for their consumers, and they are not trying to be all things to everyone. That has the advantage that if you are in Apple’s target audience, you get a very nice, polished system. If not, you are free to use many of the various other computers that are available.

They have made decisions that they think are best for extracting profit from their consumers.

Apple is no different from any other company in its unsatiable appetite for profit --- only its marketing has been vastly more successful.

If not, you are free to use many of the various other computers that are available.

The problem is others who think emulating Apple's path will also ensure success, which eventually means no real choice.

Calling Apple “omakase” is a very classy analogy. Never heard that before, makes a lot of sense. Did you make that up? Just perfect.

> Did you make that up?

I stole the analogy from this article talking about Rails and applied it to Apple.

https://dhh.dk/2012/rails-is-omakase.html

Extended this tangent, the conventional expression for this is "opinionated", but same idea.

Oh I should have known it was from DHH. Really talented and smart guy.

airgapped systems that never touch the internet, such as: [...] SCIFs, or other secure/offline data processing facilities

It seems to me that if you were buying hardware for a totally airgapped system for a SCIF or something, you wouldn't buy a computer with built-in wifi or bluetooth at all. I mean, really? Does the NSA buy consumer hardware with network interfaces they don't intend to use?

No, in fact you cannot have device that does radio transmission in a SCIF.

Ugh. That gig I did. Had to be on-site (10h travel). Had to leave facility to get Internet, get my phone out of a cubby and leave the building to text my wife. Big Security is inconvenient.

>text my wife. Big Security is inconvenient.

Depends on ones wife...

I would think air gapped networks probably ran Linux. But I know I heard once some nuclear power uses Windows, looks like that's in Japan. Kind of doubt people are using Macs in that sort of environment, other than maybe a client machine. Feel like it's either going to be Windows or Linux for more industrial stuff.

Air gapped computers run whatever. I've not personally seen MacOS though I wouldn't be surprised. There is a fair bit of secret mobile development, and that requires MacOS.

Nuclear subs run (or ran) Windows XP.

Plenty of exploit dev systems running in SCIFs! You would want you exploit accidentally collected by the manufacturer, and you certainly don't want binary hashes linked to a device.

This is a great example of the divergence between "military-grade" security and real world security. Most people will never "fully wipe, zero out, and then boot from cryptographically verified (locally, on other high assurance systems) boot media" so Apple's restrictions aren't a problem. But Apple's anti-theft system does benefit normal people.

These 2 worlds increasingly overlap. For example the collateral damage of the 2017 NotPetya cyberattack made tens of multinational companies disclose material impact to their P/L. The retaliatory DDoS attacks following the Iran sanctions in 2012 had a big impact on banks worldwide. Based on these cherry-picked examples you could even say that the real world increasingly needs protection from military-policical fall-out.

How many companies are running air-gapped due to cybercrime/cyberwar? Probably none. Apple's "online" approach to security is actually stronger if you're going to be online anyway.

He's talking about Apple Configurator and yes, it connects to Apple to download the T2 firmware automatically:

https://support.apple.com/guide/apple-configurator-2/revive-...

"You may need to configure your web proxy or firewall ports to allow all network traffic from Apple devices to Apple’s network 17.0.0.0/8."

Much of the attack vector the author focuses on is pinpointing a user who is restoring their system by their IP address and sending down a poison payload.

One way to counteract that is to send this traffic through a Layer 3 proxy. That will obfuscate the true source of the system that is making these reset requests (at least it will mask the IP — not sure if there are other unique identifiers sent along the wire).

If there were no other unique identifiers for a machine how would they be able to create a key that's specific to it? If they can't create a specifc key the entire thing is just for show and it's certainly not with iOS devices.

Right good point. I meant something that would reveal the environment where the machine was running in versus the serial number or something similar.

Basically, my only real point was that at least the IP address can be hidden from Apple.

Wow, this is extremely unfortunate. And I'm pretty surprised it's the first I'm hearing about it, given that T2 chips have been out for a while.

Is this true even if the OS is installed to an external hard disk, such as a USB drive? That's not a great solution of course, but perhaps a partial one?

It may be a one-in-a-million risk, but I don't like the idea that if some disaster strikes and takes out industrial civilization, at some point we could have perfectly good laptops that are no better than bricks because they can't talk to Apple over the internet...

I'd be more worried about other things if a disaster big enough takes out civilization than trying to clean wipe a Macbook.

It might be that we need those machines for some practical purpose.

Or like... your country decides it no longer likes Apple and blocks all connections to it

The laptop will work until it needs to be wiped and reset.

You have reached Peak HN.

After the fall of the Roman Empire, technology that could survive in decentralized state survived. That’s why this occurs to me.

So the collapse of industrial civilization brought by a cataclysmic disaster will not only leave electricity and telecommunications intact but also require a working laptop

Huh

Think the scene at the end of Terminator 3.

Also, doesn’t hurt to plan for the unexpected right

Also what if just the Bay Area got wiped out?

If you need to do something like what the author does, you should not use a mac in the first place, but use a 100% open source machine that is put together from different parts from different shops and put in a Faraday cage.

> This means that macs, even the recent Intel ones, are now entirely unsuitable for certain critically important industrial applications

For "secure/offline data processing facilities" or "systems that must maintain cryptographic integrity", why would a closed source operating system even be considered in the first place? I don't think this is a good use case for a Mac.

Open source doesn’t solve that problem. I would hope that critical crypto functions aren’t using OpenSSL for example.

We used to fix about 80% of the apple products coming in for recycling around 5 years ago by swapping parts and sending them back into action. Now it's mostly scrap waist that ends up in a land fill.

If your use case is what the author describes then why consider Apple products anyway? Your threat model (whatever this is) defines your choice of hard- and software, not the other way around. Apple doesn't care its products don't fit 0,5% of all the use cases. There are other products and mitigations (TEMPEST anyone?) for that

  >If your use case is what the author describes then why consider Apple products anyway?...

I was wondering that too. For someone so declaredly privacy conscious and suspicious of Apple's motives, he sure does seem to throw a lot of money their way:

https://sneak.berlin/20170107/current-daily-carry/

The T2 chip has utterly failed its purpose. It doesn’t seems to stop any dedicated actor (government or any security company) to crack someone’s phone, all it does is hampering the right of repairing and brings troubles to power users.

The theft prevention/deterrent seems to work ok, doesn't it?

no, locked machines are stripped or sold for parts. there’s no reason for this other than institutional control of users, while furthering apples overall corporate mantra of planned obsolescence.

The fact that they can't bypass the system tells me it is working as intended. Also the data on the encrypted SSDs remains safe.

What we see now is that companies like Apple, and other hardware & software manufacturers as well, is transforming into service companies, you are de facto renting the system you have purchased.

Service companies in other sectors, like social media, is actively banning their customers when the customer in some way is not following the service contract.

I predict this will be the next logical evolution, customers will be banned from their purchased hardware.

apple no longer makes general purpose computers. they make iphones, and iphones with keyboards. unfortunately, the processor tech seems spectacular from all accounts.

> unfortunately, the processor tech seems spectacular from all accounts.

Why is it unfortunate that their CPUs are great?

If a product has no "redeeming features", it does not matter what restrictions are placed on your use of it, people will often not choose to use it.

If a product is, however, a leader in a field, then many more people will likely make the tradeoff to use the product and restrict themselves.

further, apple no longer get’s to portray themselves as a privacy focused company. if I don’t have control over whether or not I can turn my computer on, I have no right to privacy on an apple computer and I have no data security on an apple computer. It’s one thing if it were a feature a user could opt in or even out of, it’s another to be a consequence of sale. apple used to be a computer company, but they got used to the power they have over ios users and decided to downgrade all of their customers to that level of personal determination, freedom. but hey, at least the RIAA and various nation states that have enough sway to boss apple around will be happy with it.

Apple may sell you a computer, but ultimately you do not control it.

Who really controls your computer: https://youtu.be/Ag1AKIl_2GM?t=57

What's the alternative? It's not Windows, or anything else running on Intel-based boards. A Raspberry Pi running Linux?

When I read rumors about the new Magsafe leading to the removal of all ports on the iPhone, I had my doubts because the lightning port is the only reasonable way to restore the device after a bad update. Maybe Apple's not too concerned with this...

Contactless USB-compatible dock is not impossible

They could also implement some kind of diagnostic port, not unlike what already exists on the Apple Watch

https://www.macrumors.com/2015/04/23/apple-watch-diagnostic-...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com