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

[viewfly]

So, you're saying if you had Apple replace with a GENUINE sensor, it's brick? I don't think that is the case.

Also, in another life, I would reprogram chips for cars. The manufacturers were starting to reject these if modified. This is not new. The car would not start.

i wonder if it's really bricked?

Given an replaced OEM sensor it doesn't function but can be synchs and work by Apple. It's not bricked.

How a 3 rd party sensor ever worked is beyond me. I think Apple found a security leak and fixed it in iOS 9.

Just replacing a OEM sensor was an issue known 3 years ago
2013:
"According to iMore, each individual Touch ID sensor is paired with its corresponding A7 processor. To confirm the pairing theory, iMore switched the Touch ID sensors from two brand new iPhones and attempted to setup each device. Each phone failed to recognize the sensors and returned an error until the sensors were swapped back to their original phones"

http://9to5mac.com/2013/10/31/the-i...print-sensor-is-paired-to-a-specific-a7-chip/

 

[Dranix]

Could we just make it so that S versions of the iPhone are for those of us concerned about security, and make the C versions of the phone for Consumers?

Then I get the security I require, and the average person that doesn't mind playing roulette gets to do so.

ANYBODY should care about security. Thinking like yours is the source of all insecure systems on the planet.

Edit: Btw whats with us citizens and their lawsuits? Is your country rules by lawyers?

 

[samcraig]

Apple warned you. This printed little guide is probably still in your iPhone box.
Everything is right in there.

Did you see the part about authorized? Because users are reporting that they did go to an authorized repair show and still got bricked.

 

[ColdShadow]

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?

Because Apple's term didn't mention that a third party repair will result in iPhone self de-struct.

people have been using third party repair services for all electronic devices forever,not ideal,but it worked.normally the only problem will be losing warranty.but self destruction of a device is new.
it should have been mentioned in terms and conditions.
End if story.

 

[LV426]

Did you see the part about authorized? Because users are reporting that they did go to an authorized repair show and still got bricked.

But they didn't do the job properly. The repairer should be liable for introducing a fault.

 

[sim667]

Your knowledge of EU consumer law is incorrect, just like your understanding of the term warranty.

Firstly, this is not law. It is an EU directive. As such, the UK (which is currently in the EU) hasn't adopted this directive because our consumer laws exceed this directive. As such i'll explain our consumer law in the UK.

Consumer sales are governed by the Sales of Goods Act 1979, Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

Secondly - There is NO law in the UK that states a retailer or manufacturer has to give a warranty on their products. If they do offer a warranty, they can stipulate terms in their Terms and Conditions. However, these terms have to be fair (Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999)

If a product becomes faulty, you return it to the retailer as thats who your contract is with. Within the first 6 months its automatically deemed inherently faulty and the retailer can either refund, repair or replace. After 6 months, the onus is on the consumer to prove the product was inherently faulty. This can be done by means of getting an independent report stating this. The retailer then has to refund, repair or replace the item and refund the cost of the report. In the UK you have 6 years to make a claim against the retailer, in the rest of the EU it is limited to 2 years.

The EU law talks about how long you’ve got to complain, not how long goods should actually last. And while it’s minimum 2 years, in the UK we actually get SIX years to do the same.

Its worth noting that we also have the Consumer Rights Act introduced in 2015.

http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/consumer-rights-act

The Consumer Rights Act introduces:

• 30 days to get a refund For the first time a specific timeframe has been created in which you can reject a faulty item and get a full refund - now 30 days
• A 'tiered' remedy system In place for faulty goods, digital content and services, this means your rights to a refund are now more clearly set out. Whether you're entitled to a refund depends on how long you've owned the product.
• Failed repairs After one failed attempt by the retailer to repair or replace a faulty item, you're entitled to ask for a refund or price reduction.
• A second repair or replacement If you don't want a refund or price reduction, you have the right to request another repair or replacement at no cost to you.
• Deductions from refunds No deduction can be made from a refund in the first six months after purchase. The only exception to this is motor vehicles, where a reasonable reduction may be made for the use you’ve had of the vehicle.
• Digital content rights This new law gives consumers rights in relation to online digital content that is paid for, digital content supplied free with other paid for items and digital content supplied on a physical medium, such as a DVD.
• Unfair terms in consumer contracts It will now be easier for consumers to challenge hidden fees and charges. Now the key terms of a contract, including price, may be assessed for fairness unless they’re both prominent and transparent.

We still have the 6 year warranty, its just after 6 months we have to prove the damage is no fault of the consumer.

The EU warranty law is for 2 years I believe.

So far I've managed to get my iPhone repaired by apple, with the cost reimbursed by 3 mobile (out of warranty), and my macbook pro is just about to have its second out of warranty repair under these laws (although the second repair is under the warranty of the first repair, as the first repair didn't work).

Shops actively deny that this exists in the UK. If they do, then they need reporting to trading standards.

 

[Popeye206]

What I want to know is how many people has this really affected and what has Apple really done about it on a one-on-one level? This may be a big ta-doo over something that is really very isolated.

 

[Gudi]

Did you see the part about authorized? Because users are reporting that they did go to an authorized repair shop and still got bricked.

And then they have every right to complain about Apple and the company will try to help them as good as possible without you needing a lawyer, because you are still under warranty. And even if your one year limited warranty is up, there is a new six month warranty on the repair starting with the date of your repair. So you can put trust in your authorized repair even in the repair itself failed the first time. Your problem will be resolved eventually and on Apples cost.

 

[samcraig]

What I want to know is how many people has this really affected and what has Apple really done about it on a one-on-one level? This may be a big ta-doo over something that is really very isolated.

Perhaps. But if this is the status quo for how this will be treated in the future, the # of cases is going to pile up. And continue to be a subject or PR damage control
[doublepost=1455280874][/doublepost]

And then they have every right to complain about Apple and the company will try to help them as good as possible without you needing a lawyer, because you are still under warranty. And even if your one year limited warranty is up, there is a new six month warranty on the repair starting with the date of your repair. So you can put trust in your authorized repair even in the repair itself failed the first time. Your problem will be resolved eventually and on Apples cost.

Apparently some are saying that Apple's response is to allow them to buy a replacement device at a discounted cost. So one could argue that "coverage" and their response hasn't been what people believe they might be entitled to.

More important to me is to really find out why/how it would really cause an issue to have a 3rd party sensor. There hasn't been any non-crazy scenario in which it would really be a security thread enough to brick a phone.

 

[macfacts]

Would the mods update the article with a bit more info?

Clarify the reason the phone doesn't boot is because ALL data is encrypted, including the one required to boot, and for it to be decrypted ALL of the hardware responsible for encryption must not have been tampered with.

...

Except the iphones fixed by unauthorized repairmen do work.

Let me type that again in all caps. THE FIXED IPHONES WORK.

The iphones brick when doing an iOS update or iOS restore. It isn't because of a new security feature in the new iOS update, it is because the additional security check (assuming it is a security check and is bricked on purpose and not some bug) is done during the OS install/restore process. This error 53 is not new.

If this security check was done on bootup instead and the iphone bricked right away, people would be blaming the unauthorized repairman.

 

[MH01]

But they didn't do the job properly. The repairer should be liable for introducing a fault.

Error 53 can happen when no repair has been done....... That does not worry you? Suddenly as the end user you are liable and your device is bricked, and if it's out of warranty, apple will not fix it. Guess what happened , the Touch ID failed due to wear and a device never in danger of having its data lost, cause it's in original condition with a hardware fault is now a brick?

Concerning ?

 

[Gudi]

Apparently some are saying that Apple's response is to allow them to buy a replacement device at a discounted cost.

If indeed it was an authorized repair then Apple is obliged to make it work, even if that means to give the customer a brand new phone for free, if the old one can't be repaired.

 

[AbSoluTc]

ANYBODY should care about security. Thinking like yours is the source of all insecure systems on the planet.

Edit: Btw whats with us citizens and their lawsuits? Is your country rules by lawyers?

Please don't group the majority of US citizens into the "sue happy" category. A LOT of us find it absurd, ridiculous and for lack of a better word, ****ing stupid.

 

[Crayo]

One thing should never happen as a result of this:

Apple should never allow 3rd party Touch ID sensor without proper encryption keys to access the A7 chips encrypted storage. If Apple allows this, it would bring serious mayhem to not only Apple device security but also Apple Pay security and credibility.

However, if customer chooses to install possibly security compromising 3rd party Touch ID sensor, the correct action would be to disallow usage of any related services; such as Touch ID authentication and Apple Pay; along with proper explanatory warnings shown and let the device function otherwise.

This would not violate customers legal right to cripple their devices local security measures.

 

[palmerc]

I agree that their Touch ID should be disabled, but is there some reason that's not possible?

If they got a message saying "Touch ID disabled" I'd say these people have no case.

But as it is, isn't this like making your iMac refuse to boot because you broke the DVD drive?

When you see a message on an OS that says, "Error 53," this is a situation they didn't account for during development.

There is clearly a sense of entitlement that 'repairing' a device with uncertified, used or potentially counterfeit parts by people not properly trained by the manufacturer should just work, but that is just naive. Security always cuts both ways.

 

[Carlanga]

Your not installing it right.

Tocayo its: *You're

 

[Zellio]

I wonder if the apple kiss asses would like it if their imac blew up the next time they installed third party ram

This is ridiculous

 

[iMacC2D]

Removed.

 

[Gudi]

Error 53 can happen when no repair has been done... That does not worry you? Suddenly as the end user you are liable and your device is bricked, and if it's out of warranty, apple will not fix it.

Apple must fix it when error 53 occurs without any repair, than it's a problem with assembly in the Foxconn factory. In this case the 2 year EU warranty is effective.

Guess what happened, the Touch ID failed due to wear and a device never in danger of having its data lost, cause it's in original condition with a hardware fault is now a brick?

Wearing is normal and not Apples problem after the warranty is up. You have to pay for repair and maybe you must restore from backup.

 

[Thunderhawks]

People are sue crazy. Sheesh... I'm all for suing when warranted but this isn't the time.

Apple admits no wrong doing , but has agreed to pay $ 5 itunes card for the total of 1,216 people affected.
Make sure you have your repair receipts or no dice.

$ 12 million or more for the lawyers

 

[Popeye206]

If indeed it was an authorized repair then Apple is obliged to make it work, even if that means to give the customer a brand new phone for free, if the old one can't be repaired.

The "authorized repair" is I thought what the issue was and that the repairs bricking the phone are not using authorized parts?

 

[rdlink]

Disabling Touch ID would protect them. What function does killing the OS serve over that?

http://www.apple.com/business/docs/iOS_Security_Guide.pdf

It's fairly clear when reading this document that screwing with the Touch ID puts the phone's security overall at risk. I'm pretty sure that Apple's engineers will be able to explain this at trial.

 

[Zellio]

Apple must fix it when error 53 occurs without any repair, than it's a problem with assembly in the Foxconn factory. In this case the 2 year EU warranty is effective.
Wearing is normal and not Apples problem after the warranty is up. You have to pay for repair and maybe you must restore from backup.

And what happens when phones/Apple products are out of date and/or grandfathered and no longer serviced by Apple? You have spent many pages arguing for 2-5 year hardware rentals. I do hope that if you get your wish you never fall in love with an older device, as it will become a nice door stop.

 

[thespacekid]

This is terrible of Apple. Third parties should be allowed to replace security hardware such as the finger print reader that allows bad guys to get into phones. What was Apple thinking?

 

[Zellio]

This is terrible of Apple. Third parties should be allowed to replace security hardware such as the finger print reader that allows bad guys to get into phones. What was Apple thinking?

Better to rent out that hardware you pay for then to protect you from your bad ideas right?

If this was the case in the past you wouldn't have the ability to change out screens if you shattered them just as one example.