Class action suit against Apple claims that this security feature was forced on customers

Class action suit against Apple claims that this security feature was forced on customers
Two-factor authentication is a more secure method of signing into a device. Here's how it works. Let's say you want to login to a device or an app. After punching in your password, a code is sent to another "trusted device" like the phone in your hand. Tap in the code on the device or app you want to open, and viola! Well it appears that two-factor authentication (2FA) isn't for everyone. In California, an Apple customer by the name of Jay Brodsky has started a class action suit against Apple because 2FA "imposes an extraneous logging in procedure that requires a user to both remember password; and have access to a trusted device or trusted phone number."

Brodsky's suit says that Apple doesn't allow a user to disable 2FA after 14 days have gone by. Additionally, the filing notes that Apple does not get user consent to enable the feature, or to remove the option to disable it. Brodsky says that "consumers across the nation have been and continue to suffer harm." And by harm, he means that the time spent using 2FA to open devices is costing businesses money and consumers their time. Brodsky, and the other members of the class, are seeking monetary damages and an injunction against Apple to prevent the company from "continuing its practice of not allowing a user to choose its (sic) own logging and security procedure."

The filing claims that Brodsky owns an iPhone and a pair of Macbooks and that on or around September 2015, a software update enabled 2FA for his Apple ID without his consent. He goes on to state that every time he turns on one of his Apple devices, he is forced to use 2FA and must use it for Apple Services and to open some third party apps. The essence of Brodsky's filing is that it takes him 2 minutes to 5 minutes longer for each login using the extra steps required with 2FA.

As pointed out by Apple Insider, in September 2015 Apple customers could only enable 2FA through a procedure that required them to opt-in. In addition, the suit itself contains a screenshot of an email sent to those who enabled 2FA on their Apple device(s) containing a link to "return to...previous security settings." The plaintiff says that the email doesn't make it clear that after 14 days, the link to disable 2FA expires even though it is written explicitly at the end of the message (see image directly below).

Image of email from law suit; plaintiff claims that the wording doesn't make it clear that after 14 days, 2FA cannot be disabled

Image of email from law suit; plaintiff claims that the wording doesn't make it clear that after 14 days, 2FA cannot be disabled


Perhaps the most important line in the suit as far as Brodsky, the class, and the lawyers are concerned is the one that read, "Apple, Inc. is a multi-billion dollar company."


FEATURED VIDEO

14 Comments

1. Subie

Posts: 2302; Member since: Aug 01, 2015

Good luck buddy!...

2. lyndon420

Posts: 6518; Member since: Jul 11, 2012

This guy is sueing apple over his inability to read what's in front of him? Seriously?

3. darkkjedii

Posts: 30836; Member since: Feb 05, 2011

Two step can be a bit of a pain, but c’mon bruh...reallyyyyyyyyyyy.

12. ph00ny

Posts: 2002; Member since: May 26, 2011

it is indeed. I left my note 8 at the 17th hole of the golf course (I use my phone for score keep and gps distance) and i couldn't log into the device manager from iphone since i needed another android device to authenticate the login. Luckily it was a private event and i took the golf cart and traced back to the 17th tee

4. ztkells

Posts: 41; Member since: Jan 26, 2011

This is one of the more ridiculous things. I hope he gets charged for all of Apples time on top. Though I'm sure it would add up to only 5 minutes time for everyone to look over the facts and laugh. Smdh.

5. L0n3n1nja

Posts: 1521; Member since: Jul 12, 2016

About the only thing more idiotic than this would be a lawsuit over the removal of the FPS. No one forced him to use it, he simply failed to read, makes ya wonder how bad his business or personal finances are doing. Hope the judge dismisses this.

6. cncrim

Posts: 1573; Member since: Aug 15, 2011

He’s just want to make a quick buck....

7. palmguy

Posts: 965; Member since: Mar 22, 2011

Make a buck on Apple? Apple's lawyers have layers.

8. phoneguynh

Posts: 19; Member since: Oct 31, 2018

Personally I love apple products and their security. Simple answer for this woman, if you don’t like it then switch to Android no one is forcing you to have apple.

9. Subie

Posts: 2302; Member since: Aug 01, 2015

Good thing you're not defending the case for Apple. Your argument could actually help validate "his" law suit, as having to switch would not only cost more time but also money...

10. Vokilam

Posts: 1111; Member since: Mar 15, 2018

I do hope that we have the option to opt out - I don’t care for this extra security layer. It’s annoying and I’m not that important.

11. boriqua2000

Posts: 242; Member since: Mar 11, 2009

Go Android or go home

13. Ichimoku

Posts: 137; Member since: Nov 18, 2018

Anti-vaxxer

14. NarutoKage14

Posts: 1306; Member since: Aug 31, 2016

I'm with Apple on this one. This lawsuit is beyond frivolous.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.