Apple Facing Class Action Lawsuit Over 'Error 53' iPhone 6 Bricking

[MH01]

Seems like all of this has been rehashed many times over 20 pages of this thread...not sure there was a need to bring up the same thing yet again given that all of it is already here in the thread many times over.

Yeah, unrelated as usual.

We have moderators that do a great jobs on MR I don't believe anyone has been deputised ..... sir.....

 

[dk001]

Looks like the lawsuit was dismissed: https://www.macrumors.com/2016/06/21/apple-error-53-lawsuit-dismissed/

Appreciate the followup. Kind of lost track of this....

 

[LordVic]

Appreciate the followup. Kind of lost track of this....

I had always assumed as soon as Apple offered fixes for the error 53, and restored users phones back to usable, and re-imbursed people who had out of pocket expenses.. that the lawsuit would be dropped too.

 

[scrannel]

So... They made third-party repairs, which annulled their warranty, and bricked their phone and now they're suing? Why does Apple owe them anything, exactly? Didn't they agree to Apple's terms when they purchased the device?

It's illegal for Apple or any other manufacturer in the US to require a user to only use the maker's service. Violation of Sherman Anti-trust law and restraint of trade. Error 53 was Apple's way of punishing people for not obeying. That's why it can be easily reversed. EU has similar laws.

 

[Yio]

It amazes me how little people actually care about their security (and do not confuse security with privacy here). Apple is trying to protect its users, but they are too stupid to realize.

But on the other hand, Availability is a part of the CIA triad so bricking the phone does violate this premise.

However, Apple is doing this because a piece of hardware inserted between the Touch-ID Sensor and the Secure Enclave could in theory either intercept scans or access the enclave.

They are doing this to protect you, not as a "screw you for trying to fix your own phone." People will always see what they want to see though, I suppose.

I don’t see how using a third party piece of hardware can jeopardize someone’s iPhone? The process sends a signal message to the phone based on the persons finger print. Unless there is a way to use a third party home button that tricks the phone into thinking it was a ligit passcode. Then I can see the need to deny access.
That doesn’t mean the whole phone should be bricked.

So to say people are stupid (me being someone who has been affected on a harmful degree) and don’t understand is a ignorance and words of someone with a complex.

I was told by the apple staff in the apple store that it would be perfectly ok to use a third party home button. So not sure everyone fits the “stupid” category.

 

[C DM]

I don’t see how using a third party piece of hardware can jeopardize someone’s iPhone? The process sends a signal message to the phone based on the persons finger print. Unless there is a way to use a third party home button that tricks the phone into thinking it was a ligit passcode. Then I can see the need to deny access.
That doesn’t mean the whole phone should be bricked.

So to say people are stupid (me being someone who has been affected on a harmful degree) and don’t understand is a ignorance and words of someone with a complex.

I was told by the apple staff in the apple store that it would be perfectly ok to use a third party home button. So not sure everyone fits the “stupid” category.

Apple already addressed the issue: https://www.macrumors.com/2016/02/18/apple-ios-9-2-1-error-53-fix/

 

[DevNull0]

It amazes me how little people actually care about their security (and do not confuse security with privacy here). Apple is trying to protect its users, but they are too stupid to realize.

But on the other hand, Availability is a part of the CIA triad so bricking the phone does violate this premise.

However, Apple is doing this because a piece of hardware inserted between the Touch-ID Sensor and the Secure Enclave could in theory either intercept scans or access the enclave.

They are doing this to protect you, not as a "screw you for trying to fix your own phone." People will always see what they want to see though, I suppose.

If there were any truth to that outside Apple's own marking FUD, then they would disable touch ID on third party repaired phones, not brick the entire phone. You call users stupid for not wanting their phones bricked even if they understand the risks and bricking is not necessary to ensure security. I'd call it stupid to eat up every marking message from Apple as if it were unchallengeable fact and not allow anyone to apply thought or common sense to their marketing message.

And for a lot of users, they don't have anything that important on the phone anyway, so it's really not a big deal. I don't use my phone for anything more than phone calls, web browsing, and internet tether to my macbook where I actually do everything.

 

[C DM]

What's the point of essentially randomly digging something up from over 3 years ago to basically rehash it after it has already been commented on for over 20 pages already 3 years ago?

 

[mi7chy]

Apple is quick to brick your iPhone and also to cover up data recovery of important photos/files.