“Further, the bill has a component that prevents manufacturers from being required to make tools, parts, and documentation available for any component that would disable or override antitheft security measures, which would encompass features like Face ID.”
All Apple has to do is claim that some part is security-sensitive and they don’t have to make it available. Or they can part things together in a “package” and only make that available. Need a $1 chip? Tough, you have to buy the screen sub assembly that costs $750.
“The screen is bonded directly to the front-facing camera, so the screen assembly must never be separated in order to prevent tampering with FaceID. As an additional anti-tamper measure, we’ve also recently begun permanently soldering the harness responsible for connecting the screen assembly and TPM. Unfortunately, this means that the screen assembly and motherboard cannot be separated without compromising system security. For the protection of our users, we at Apple cannot in good conscience offer any individual parts other than the case and master screen+motherboard assembly.”
They either managed to guarantee that the law won’t pass or they found a loophole
Indeed… apple have spent a lot of time engineering their phones so you can’t replace parts. Even batteries are coded to the phone.
I can’t see them reversing that.
Go to the latest video on Louis Rossmann’s channel. Check the comment section, they found a loophole
“Further, the bill has a component that prevents manufacturers from being required to make tools, parts, and documentation available for any component that would disable or override antitheft security measures, which would encompass features like Face ID.”
All Apple has to do is claim that some part is security-sensitive and they don’t have to make it available. Or they can part things together in a “package” and only make that available. Need a $1 chip? Tough, you have to buy the screen sub assembly that costs $750.
Something like this, I imagine:
I only see comments claiming they found a loophole and the move was anticompetitive so smaller manufacturers break down.
No sources.