Apple update looks like Czech mate for locked-out iPhone user
theregister.com
theregister.com
Sounds more like an actual bug than a decision to change the keyboard layout, if this happens only in the passcode screen?
Then he couldn’t login, because login screen does not have a special character keyboard.
EDIT: found it https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10742351 (apparently I remember it slightly wrong, but idea still the same)
And do your could backups cross-provider. You never know what the "big players" are going to pull, and your lifetime customer value is less than the cost of a single support call.
On PCs you still have Linux that resists enshittification and you can pick your own hardware, but it's a really sad state of affairs that there is literally no meaningful mobile system that isn't actively hostile to the user.
People need to wake up to the fact that Android has become iOS but worse.
You wan't to access some files off your network using smb? Here install this third party tool and don't forget to give it full read/write access to your device.
I'm quite wary of using SD card for backup. Too easy for me to lose.
Or release some sort of open version once device is EOL'd.
The percent that might want to choose a different-than-latest version of OS would also of course be quite small, but I suspect it would be orders of magnitude larger than the other group we're speaking of just because that group of people is going to be so absurdly tiny.
In your world, they could be.
I imagine iPhone thefts would go way up. They’re worth $1000 and we just carry them everywhere - if they were easily resellble it would be a very obvious quick-money theft opportunity.
I don't know for certain why thieves are generally not typically interested in abusing user data, but I'd imagine it's because the penalties if caught would go way up. That'd go from what is generally just petty theft, which carries a slap on the wrist, to wire fraud and a whole slew of other charges, which can leave people spending most of the rest of their life in prison.
My assertion is that there would be way, way more theft if you could just downgrade and wipe.
Because a quick search for UK statistic shows that even though iPhones are minority of phones over here they are the overwhelmingly majority of all phone theft:
https://www.loveitcoverit.com/news/changing-world/mobile-pho...
"In terms of smartphone models, the data also indicates who might be most at risk. Looking at the entirety of the UK, 68.6% of stolen phones are iPhones."
“In 2012, the National Crime Survey – which supplies data to the ONS – reported that there were roughly 608,000 theft from a person incidents across England and Wales, which was a high for the decade. However, since then, theft from person cases – including those including smartphones – have fallen year on year. A key factor for this continual decline could be that smartphone security has improved to a point that it’s no longer worth stealing them; with Face ID, trackers, and fingerprint scanners, it’s now harder for criminals to wipe and fence stolen property. It’s also possible that, due to the ubiquity of smartphones, the desire to steal them has simply decreased.”
To me the surprising claim would be that phone theft is common - I don’t think I know of anyone who’s had their phone stolen - but if you want stats, sticking with the UK, here’s the official statistics on robbery and ‘theft from a person’: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeand...
It’s more work than I have time for now, but I don’t think that any of the headline figures can be regarded as ‘common’.
More emotionally: Maybe it’s just my age showing, but it is notable to me that nowadays we’re all carrying around $1000 items at all times, and muggings aren’t through the roof. Perhaps society is kinder than I gave it credit for, but I think that the lack of utility of those $1000 items if you steal them (so, they’re not really worth $1000 to a mugger) is a major part of the reason they’re not.
It's also going to make the targets even less likely to report the crime to police as well. 'Hi, I don't live in this country and I think my phone might have been stolen somewhere at some point in time over the past several hours, maybe.' is not even going to be investigated by the police, even if somebody does decide to file a report.
Come to think of it, this may all be yet another reason why thieves don't tend to abuse personal information. That sort of stuff is going to get reported and can be viably investigated by the police.
What’s even the point of setting a password if anyone can manipulate the system without entering it in?
The entire iPhone OS is on an encrypted volume and that is the right design choice. Not having the password means no access.
There is no general purpose encrypted volume operating system that allows unauthenticated users to perform OS manipulation. If you encrypt your FreeBSD, Linux, or Windows volume, the result is the same: no password, no access.
Your choice is to enter the correct password or wipe the disk.
The fact that Apple doesn’t allow you to set up a system without full disk encryption is not a user freedom issue, it’s a very sensible design choice especially for a device sold primarily to non-technical consumers who don’t understand the security implications of leaving the volume unencrypted.
The issue here isn’t that iOS security is designed wrong, the issue is that Apple broke basic password entry with an update.
Shame on Apple for having such lazy software development practices when it comes to implementing updates like this.
Also people find exploits on newer OS versions as well. Downgrading makes it easier but not downgrading doesn’t make the device unhackable.
The particular use case you’re asking for here has no logical reason for existing
Apple should be forced to do this by law, but only after they discontinue software support. If they're willing to continue making small, incremental patches when necessary (such as to fix this obvious bug) then it's fine that they can still block downgrades. But at EOL? They should be legally required to allow old software to be installed.
This also impacts software compatibility - any 64-bit device that is now EOL that got updated to iOS 11 or newer is forever barred from running 32-bit apps just because people are worried that someone might take that old device and downgrade it as an attack?
The average person should always stay updated to the latest version for security reasons. But the power users should be able to choose which version they run, at least on devices that aren't currently supported at all.
Daily reminder that the first two iPhones and the first iPod touch had zero firmware signing, and you could freely install any supported version at any time, and can still do so today. That being the case has probably harmed 0.00001% of people at most
Citation needed. My guess is the biggest contributor to smartphones becoming e-waste is gravity.
It also harms software preservation. Sure, we have IPSWs for every single public build of iOS that exists (and if you dig around, probably a ton of betas and even internal builds). But you can't really do anything with any of them once you get to the point in the iOS product line where things were sufficiently hardened
Steve Jobs would be rolling in his grave if he could see the software quality of the products that Apple releases today.
lol, nah he wouldn't. He would of upgraded his coffin to plush and got a big screen to watch the money roll in.
I recommend reading up on his 80/90's antics. All he cared about was money and that the world was crafted by him.
He was widely known for intense bullying, lacking empathy, and ruthless manipulation, combined with a "productive narcissism" that fueled his obsessive drive for perfection.
His vision of perfection didn't always match common sense. There are quite a few examples of this.
I always cringe a little when I read these "jobs would have rolled over in his grave" comments.
Some things he didn't appear to care much about, the polished UX was his schtick.
As for iOS 26, no reasonable person would have let it ship. From one source (John Gruber -> "Bad Dye Job") the previous head of Apple's UI design team who lead the UI team was just not a UX designer, he was just a visual designer or something. I think it shows.
As much of a snob that Jobs was it's nonsensical to say that he would've knowingly insisted on changes that locked users out from their devices. That's just nonsense. At the very least there would've been a prompt to change the password phrase or some such in upgrade. And if it did happen as an oversight, it would've been patched on the first report and some heads would've rolled.
If you never delete too many features, you aren’t deleting enough features.
Incorrect. Read the David Pogue Apple book. For example, after the iMac was released, the Apple board of directors offered Jobs a million shares and six million options if he switched from interim to permanent CEO. Jobs continued to refuse. “This is not about money. I have more money than I’ve ever wanted in my life.”
Most of Steve's wealth came from Pixar, which he ultimately sold to Disney, rather than from Apple.
yes that is the pattern, pioneered by Google here in California
When one pays 1000 Euros for a product, one expects a basic level of quality.
Even if Apple restores the háček in a future update, wouldn't he still need to unlock the iPhone to install it?
On the other hand, if this happens to a far more important person...
BUT you must trust the entire Apple trusted chain to protect you.
That is a rather big BUT.
But we already established unlocking is not possible, so going with the argument it's implied there is a side-channel. Nothing, but a secret in your brain is something only you can (willingly) provide. Especially not biometric data, which you distribute freely at any moment. RFID can be relayed, see carjacking.
If you can side-step the password, to potentially install malware/backdoor, that's inherently compromising security.
Could they produce an update that is bespoke and stops encrypting the next time you unlock, push it to your phone before seizing it, wait for some phone home to tell them it worked, and then grab it?
Perhaps, but the barrier to making Apple do that is much higher than "give us the key you already have", and only works if it's a long planned thing, not a "we got this random phone, unlock it for us".
(It's also something of a mutually-assured destruction scenario - if you ever compel Apple to do that, and it's used in a scenario where it's visibly the case that 'the iPhone was backdoored' is the only way you could have gotten that data, it's game over for people trusting Apple devices to not do that, including in your own organization, even if you somehow found a legal way to compel them to not be permitted to do it for any other organization.)
The attack situation would be e.g. at the airport security check, where you have to part with your device for a moment. That's a common way for law enforcement and intelligence to get a backdoor onto a device. Happens all the time. You wouldn't be able to attribute it to Apple collaborating with agencies or them using some zero-day exploit. For starters, you likely wouldn't be aware of the attack at all. If you came home to a shut-down phone, would you send your 1000$ device to some security researcher thinking it's conceivably compromised, or just connect it to a charger?
If you can manually install anything on a locked phone, that's increasing the attack surface, significantly. You wouldn't have to get around the individual key to unlock the device, but mess with the code verification process. The latter is an attractive target, since any exploit or leaked/stolen/shared key will be potentially usable on many devices.
Part of the reason e.g. Cellebrite is obsessive about not telling people many specifics about their product capabilities outside of NDA is that Apple is quite serious about trying to fix these things, and "we can crack every iPhone before the 14" probably tells them a fair bit about what might have a flaw.
Tools like that lose a lot of value if anyone paying enough attention can infer they exist, even indirectly, like if all the TSA agents you know suddenly switch to Android phones, or some of them tell you not to bring iPhones through security and won't tell you why, or a thousand other vectors for rumors to start.
All it takes is enough rumors for people to say it's enough to not trust any more, and suddenly you've lost a lot of the value of a secret information source.
So if you have a tool like that, where most people don't think it's readily available, the way you probably use it is very sparingly, to keep it that way.
Would you bet, the NSA can't sign iOS updates?
> So if you have a tool like that, where most people don't think it's readily available, the way you probably use it is very sparingly, to keep it that way.
Of course. This is reserved for targeted attacks against journalists and other enemies of the state.
> All it takes is enough rumors for people to say it's enough to not trust any more, and suddenly you've lost a lot of the value of a secret information source.
As if Apple users would care...
https://www.apple.com/legal/transparency/us.html
https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-privacy-analytics-class-act...
https://thenextweb.com/news/apple-apps-on-big-sur-bypass-fir...
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/oct/23/trump-white-...
https://www.404media.co/iceblock-owner-after-apple-removes-a...
https://www.404media.co/apple-gave-governments-data-on-thous...
https://www.404media.co/fbi-extracts-suspects-deleted-signal...
"We can be legally compelled to give up data we have" and "we thought letting people have custom kernel modules was a bigger threat" are not particularly incompatible with "we design things so we don't have keys to your data we can be compelled to give up" and valuing people's security. (I am not a fan of the latter, to be clear, but there are reasonable reasons you could argue for it.)
But yes, I would probably, at the moment, bet that if the NSA can sign a custom iOS build on consumer hardware, Apple doesn't know about how, both because that's a very hard secret to keep, and because you'd see a massive uptick in people avoiding Apple devices in governments that might be of interest to US intelligence if even a rumor of that got out.
You are moving the goalpost.
> "We can be legally compelled to give up data we have" and "we thought letting people have custom kernel modules was a bigger threat" are not particularly incompatible with "we design things so we don't have keys to your data we can be compelled to give up" and valuing people's security. (I am not a fan of the latter, to be clear, but there are reasonable reasons you could argue for it.)
They do have the signing keys your iPhone will gladly accept to circumvent encryption, which is the argument.
I'm not the one moving the goalpost; my argument was that Apple's incentives are not in favor of them permitting even the appearance that they might allow that kind of compromise, your argument with that wall of articles appeared to be that Apple has a history of making decisions inconsistent with that, which I disputed. If that wasn't your intended argument, you might wish to be more explicit than a wall of links and "As if Apple users would care...".
> They do have the signing keys your iPhone will gladly accept to circumvent encryption, which is the argument.
Yes, and my argument is that the plumbing for either multiple release signing keys, one of which is never seen in the wild, or to avoid a second "iOS 13.1.5" or whatever with different build information showing up in various telemetry that would leak this existing, is very difficult to have built without far too many people who would spread rumors about it coming about, and even that rumor would be a problem.
So the most plausible thing, to me, would be that if such a capability exists, it's a "nuclear option" for whoever holds it to only use in a circumstance where it's so important they don't mind potentially never being able to use it again, whether that's because it's an exploit chain that will be fixed or because it's been coerced out of the target company and they will probably be compelled to fix it if it gets out.
If I burn someone’s wallet and throw the ashes to the wind nobody can pickpocket them for it. Secure.
I wonder what the thought process (or perhaps lack thereof) at Apple was. Did no one of the likely-somewhat-large team who did that think "wait, this could lock out our users who may have used that character"?
In the immortal words of Linus Torvalds: "WE DO NOT BREAK USERSPACE!"
Now one of the ways in might be those companies who claim to be able to break iPhone security for law enforcement and the like, but I'm not sure if they'd be willing to do it (at any price) unless you could somehow trick them into thinking you had some "interesting" data on there...
Sure they have most of their stuff translated but some rough edges make me feel they do the bare minimum:
- Their ISO keyboard sucks. Sure their overall quality makes it good but of the major brands their Enter key is the most flimsy attempt at it
- Some long standing bugs https://discussions.apple.com/thread/250299816?sortBy=rank (which I had the impressions they were made worse in localized version or at least if you used a non American date format)
- General weirdness with translation missing sometimes
And from what I've seen, Apple's always supported fewer languages and input methods than Google/Microsoft, like they simply cant be bothered.
I don't think we can assume the team is large.
It’s a combining accent character. It’s used to alter other characters (e.g. “c” to “č”). It doesn’t make sense to use it standalone.
Apple probably fixed a bug and https://xkcd.com/1172/ followed.
People are afraid of AI, but human organizations can be quite opaque as well.
That said, as a Czech, I wouldn't use any accentuated characters in my passwords. Anything beyond 7-bit ASCII is just asking for trouble.
If you read the ancient Greek stories, a consistent theme is that, if you offend the gods, they will punish you...
...but they're at least as likely to do it by cursing someone blameless who will then have an effect on you as they are by cursing you directly.
On a typewriter, I would expect one to type the latin character, hit backspace, and then add the mark? Or if using a typewriter without the necessary mark, just type the latin characters, then add the marks with a pen to the full sheet.
Twice I have had the touchscreen fail on Android devices and been able to get what I needed off them using a USB mouse.
sigh.
Makes sense why he didn't do this.
Just interns pushing to prod without any review? What the hell is going on in the software industry?
Such mistakes a trillion dollar company can not allow to happen.
Only thing I can think of is some features being available later in danish compared to the English release like the swipe keyboard in iOS.
Alexa has an experimental bilingual mode but it's nerfed by its general failure to understand well.
Language support is still such an enigma.
I'm so over VLC.
That may be generally true, in this case Apple actually has an engineering team in Czechia that works on biometrics and authentication:
https://zpravy.aktualne.cz/ekonomika/apple-posili-v-praze-ty...
https://jobs.apple.com/en-gb/details/200636301-2611/software...
OTOH, if an American will whine enough on Internet, they may fix it for him. Maybe some other American should use standard Czech quotes as password to get it fixed also.
It's like they realized that emojis really shouldn't need to deal with color and gender.
It seems paramount that the OS should not allow password input of any characters which it theater takes away. At the very minimum if this is absolutely necessary to make this breaking change, the user should be warned several times that a character in the password is no longer valid and maybe even prevent the OS from upgrading before the password is changed to a forward-compatible one.
That's just excuses for moronic decisions of trillion dollar companies.
But there is already a known pattern on how to handle this which I was taught (before the original iPhone even) in university CS studies:
If the manner of entering credentials has to change,
Then on first entry, offer the old method,
And, because you now (temporarily) have the plaintext credentials, you can now inspect it and test if anything need to change for the future,
And then set a flag, or require user action , or just re-encode, to use the new method as inspection determines.
In the olden times, even ASCII wasn’t necessarily a safe bet, as many countries used their own slight variation of ASCII. For example, Japan had the Yen sign in place of the backslash. In a fictional ASCII world, Apple could have decided to remove the Yen key from the Japanese lockscreen keyboard.
What? Unicode doesn't address the problem at all. Your emoji password will look completely different depending on the encoding you use. We have multiple popular encodings right now... but instead of software that lets us specify which encoding we want to use to interpret a document, we have software that intentionally prohibits us from doing that because it's supposed to be a security risk.
UTF-8 wasn't introduced to solve the problem of there being multiple encodings of any given text, either. It was introduced to be another encoding.
> In a fictional ASCII world, Apple could have decided to remove the Yen key from the Japanese lockscreen keyboard.
That would have had no effect other than momentary user confusion. In that world, someone with a yen sign in their password would, after the keyboard update, have a backslash in their password, because their password never changed. Only the label changed.
In this world, though, it's still true that the password never changed. But what did change was that Apple implemented specific logic to prevent people from entering that password. The label didn't matter.
(And the article is ambiguous over whether the appearance of the keyboard changed or not. It's not ambiguous over whether the behavior of the keyboard changed -- it didn't:
>> Post-update, when entering the passcode, the keyboard now displays an identical accent mark in the háček's place, a feature Byrne described as "pointless; they're encoded the same."
There may or may not have been a cosmetic change to the keyboard, but there certainly was a change to the behavior of the password field.)
> That would have had no effect other than momentary user confusion. In that world, someone with a yen sign in their password would, after the keyboard update, have a backslash in their password, because their password never changed. Only the label changed.
No. The analogon to TFA would be that the old keyboard would have a Yen key and no backslash key, and the new keyboard would have no Yen key and still no backslash key. The point is that the Yen key would be removed because its character code is not part of the shared common subset of ASCII. ASCII doesn’t imply that you have a keyboard capable of entering all 128 codes. Just like Unicode doesn’t imply that your keyboard allows you to input arbitrary code points.
Are you sure you read the article? The key is still there.
> Of course you have to normalize on one encoding for password hashing (and UTF-8 is the canonical choice for that, because interfaces to hash implementations are byte-based)
This is pure gibberish. All encodings produce bytes. UTF-8 has no relationship to the concept that isn't shared by every other encoding.
Unicode defines rules you can implement to normalize these, but they change between Unicode versions and you can end up with a password that works in one Unicode version and not another.
As a comparison, if all Vietnamese people had three feet and three arms, would they all be walking around with two left and a single right Nike shoe while wearing a Champion shirt with an extra arm thrust through the sleeve?
At what point do customers and users realize they are responsible for giving consent?
No that's obviously crazy!
As a non-English speaker (Czech, actually), it is clear to me to not use non-ASCII characters in passwords, or generally not use characters that are at different position on default English keyboard and locally used keyboards, i.e. use only ASCII alphanumeric chars except 'Y' and 'Z'.
As keyboard setting is per-user setting, keyboard may be different on login screen than on regular desktop (and once-login password prompts).
Do you think most users know this?
Also, most devices nowadays ARE single user. And most (all?) OSes allow you to use alternative keyboards at the user-selection screen.
Also, all orgs recommend special characters in passwords. Czech keyboards default to accented letters on the top row instead of numbers, so why wouldn't your average Czech use those?
I don't have a text password on my iphone so I don't know whether you can paste into that field.
Since the user doesn't speak Czech, I promptly removed the Czech layout and installed two other layouts, US English and Hebrew, for the languages that the relative uses to type on the computer.
For some reason, login screen just after boot still uses Czech layout, which means Z and Y are swapped and numbers must be typed with Shift (just pressing numbers outputs Czech letters like ěščř). So when booting up the machine (remember that you can't use fingerprint during first unlock), the user must type the password in whatever layout is physically printed on the keys, even though the rest of the OS doesn't even have a mention of that layout. Somehow afterwards the OS "can" see the list of the layouts and lock screen correctly chooses the English US layout.
Alongside of that, for some reason, the key that's supposed to type ` and ~ in the US layout types some nonsense instead (a plus-minus sign and a section sign), whereas the backtick key is for some reason located between left Shift and Z (good luck unlearning years of muscle memory typing ~/Documents in the terminal)
I've never had a reason to try it, but there's also a remark that 99% of the Macs sold probably don't need to change the system-wide keyboard layout defaults, either...
[1] - https://heylon.ca/how-to-permanently-switch-default-keyboard...
[2] - https://support.apple.com/guide/mac-help/change-the-system-l...
The bug seems low likelihood but high severity for the few affected users. Other than simply never changing the login keyboard (or any of the keyboard code) or having nearly 100% test coverage, how does a company not accidentally have more of these types of issues?
This bug got popularity that’s all.
I have recently discovered several bugs in different products created by different companies. And none has been reported so far in my research despite the products' popularity. I am not surprised, since those bugs require specific combination of conditions to be triggered, which most people have never run into, like in this article.
And I don't even blame them -- the engineers probably could never think of such use cases and don't have those workflows themselves. You'd have to really go out of your way to use obscure workflows to discover them.
Although in this case Apple dropped the ball by locking user out and not providing any alternatives.
They don't. If you're anything other than an extremely casual user of iOS or macOS for a couple of years, you'll encounter things that really make you pull your hair out by shear magnitude of "how on Earth can anyone miss this!?".
The same goes for feature velocity.
> For the same reason, plugging in an external keyboard is also a no-go since freshly updated iPhones are placed in what's known as a Before First Unlock state, which prevents wired accessories from working until the passcode is entered.
The user can't even enter their passcode, how do you expect them to perform code execution?
> For the same reason, plugging in an external keyboard is also a no-go since freshly updated iPhones are placed in what's known as a Before First Unlock state, which prevents wired accessories from working until the passcode is entered.
Why can't people read stuff before commenting?
Why can't people read stuff before?
Why can't people read stuff?
Why can't people read?
Why can't people?
Why can't?
Why?
?
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
> Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that".
I'm basically numb to it at this point though. Every few days we read on this site small permutations of the same story. Sometimes people here get a little extra backchannel support, but that's a token prize for the jester who made a king chuckle.
Then a few more days go by and everyone upvotes a new iWidget to oblivion because it has 0.1 new gigablahs or takes up a milliblah less of some bullshit nobody was asking for.
All while we collectively virtue signal that people are spending too much time and relying on technology too much.
Well, it's almost Monday let's see what new bullshit convinces everyone to keep getting fucked and pay for the privilege.
I basically have turned into this guy: https://youtu.be/8AyVh1_vWYQ
Here's a challenge: walk into a store and attempt to buy a smartphone that is not iPhone or Android.
This is the situation that consumers face. Some alternatives exist, but most consumers are completely unaware of them, because the alternatives have no advertising budget or retail presence.
I think it's quite similar to the political duopoly. Third parties exist, but they have no advertising budget, and moreover, in a Catch-22 situation, they get little or no news coverage, precisely because they have no advertising budget, and thus the news media considers them "not viable." That's a self-fulfilling prophesy. Actually the same situation exists in tech: Apple and Google get huge amounts of free news coverage in addition to their paid advertising. The media appears to feel no obligation to help people escape from duopolies; guess who pays for their advertising...
Want to take pictures? Use a camera. If it somehow auto updates your photos are still on an SD card.
I get convenience has led everyone to expect their phone to do everything for them, but it's not working. When you're in a pinch you will go to a 7-Eleven and grab food, but everyone would agree that buying everything there instead of real groceries is a terrible strategy. Just because something is convenient doesn't mean it's good.
It's mostly working, though. For every story of someone experencing a severe problem, there are millions of non-stories of people not experiencing the problem.
Inconveniencing yourself every day just to avoid the rare situation is not necessarily a great life strategy. Furthermore, most consumers are not as aware of these problem cases as we are. They don't expect the worst until it's too late.
Admittedly, failing to back up is just dumb, and everyone should know that by now. On the other hand, nobody should be expecting that a software update will kill their passcode.
Be aware of characters not passwords. I feel bad for the guy but not really blame Apple here.
English is my second language and ANSI etc is following a basic character usage. Everything must boil down to 0 and 1 in the end or American English.
It is a de facto standard and maybe knowing about it is as crucial as recognizing the difference between the imperial and metric system before heading for the moon. It is a life saver.