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

[DevNull0]

If i got my phone stolen, this is exactly want i would want.... I can't use it, but neither can the person who stole it.. And isn't that the idea ?

What does that have to do with if your phone gets stolen? Without the pin or a fingerprint, there is no way to unlock it. Replacing the touchID sensor will not help hack it. The sensor needs to send some data to the secure enclave, if you have a stolen phone you don't have the data to send.

This is to help if a malicious touchID sensor is installed that also logs your fingerprints. But if that were the case, the proper fix is to disable the touchID sensor, not to brick the phone.

For what it's worth, if my phone got stolen, I wouldn't mind it being remote-bricked. But that has nothing to do with the fingerprint sensor or this security issue.

 

[Tech198]

The idea that people would steal things anyway... They see an iphone, they take it,, and assume its working... When it doesn't (and it won't) then your stored data on the phone is safe. This assumes u did the update or restore first as well.

Still, if the phone disables Touch ID, yes u can use the phone, but now u are unable to use Touch ID, it must still go to the Apple store anyway to get it looked at. so u may as well brick it so the user gets forced in the store now than use a phone without good security for a while. I can also see the point as no one would even use Touch ID so makes no difference on a bricked phone, but pure annoyance.

 

[leeds utd fc]

I love some of the replies in these three related threads.

I'm not not sure all (or even any) of the analogies work...although the one about NASA using third-party heat-shields did make me chuckle.
What does surprise me though, is the number of people here who seem to give Apple a pass on this.

I like Apple products, if I didn't I wouldn't have just bought a new 5k iMac...which is awesome IMO. But, if this indeed Apple deliberately bricking people's iPhones because they had the temerity to use an outside agency to repair their phones, then it's simply wrong. And I hope they get hammered in court.

However, until I hear more, I think it's simply a case that Apple dropped the ball on the software side, and it's a bug rather than policy. Which would be embarrassing, but not the total PR disaster that deliberately bricking phones would be.

 

[gully666uk]

I'm quite surprised how many people are supporting this unscrupulous behaviour. I recently changed my 6s Screen due to water damage (so no apple support) but I kept my original button. My phone works fine now. I hope it doesn't get blocked in the future. But when it's time to upgrade this year I may have to look elsewhere. Which is strange for me being an iPhone user since the 3. I just find this behaviour a bit lousy and some of the design choices of late have been very questionable at best. If they are dumping the headphone jack this may be the straw that breaks the camels back for me I like my headphones and I paid enough to not want to replace them anytime soon.

 

[Nanotyrns]

Apple must have known tens or hundreds of thousands of people would have non-official Touch ID sensors in their devices. So the fact that they disabled these devices - without warning - is completely unacceptable. So many people don't live anywhere near an Apple Store, or in areas where official service is available, that a third-party repair was their only option. Apple could have ran a diagnostic BEFORE the update was applied and warned the user that they were using a non-authorized sensor in their device, but Apple didn't do that. Apple just outright disabled the device, which is completely unacceptable.

Face it bud, Apple really just doesn't have an excuse here. There are so many ways they could have avoided this situation while maintaining security, but they chose the dumb route.

Nope. These are not simple parts anymore. You're not just replacing a transistor or a capacitor. There are many levels of technology involved, many of them for security reasons, and if you purchase a part that is not made by Apple and have it installed not by an authorized Apple repair center you run the risk of damaging your device. What I'm hearing here is that Apple should step in and reward customers for taking a huge risk and losing.

Ease of use, cost of repair and maintenance are all things we consider before every purchase. If having your iPhone fixed at an Apple store/repair center is too costly or out of reach (even by mail), well then there are many, many low cost Android options available. I just don't see where it's Apple's obligation to consider that I might wish to repair my phone with low quality parts by unqualified dudes and task engineers with making sure the OS will work if it detects any number of aftermarket parts.

"Apple must have known tens or hundreds of thousands of people would have non-official Touch ID sensors in their devices" - Are you kidding me? These are not off the shelf parts. These were designed with hardware and software for specific Apple devices. There is no reason at all for Apple to expect these would be out in the wild except unauthorized copies or parts that didn't pass q/a and went out the back door, and Apple is not in any way obligated to make sure their OS will work with them. They can't. They have no idea how these crap parts will even work or if they will work at all.

 

[Zellio]

The problem is that reality is shifting and this is the reality of the present. I'm not saying it is ideal, but this is where we are...

Apple has no duty to care about third party parts or third party repairs. If you chose to do a third party repair then it is on you to deal with the fallout of that repair. This is the same in cars, but it is why you'll often see third party shops warranty their work independently of the manufacturer who has no duty to cover their work.

The fact our devices can now be updated after we purchase them means you have a floating risk as a consumer if your purchase a third party part or get a third party repair. What we're seeing now is why you'll probably see future repairs at reputable shops being warrantied going forward for a period of time.

Apple has no duty to care about your desire to save money. I am not saying you shouldn't be able to save money, but it isn't Apple's job to care about that... This has been established rules or how we do aftermarket repairs forever all across our economy.



The key may disable to car immediately, but if, for whatever reason, it didn't disable the car immediately and it happened a week or month or year later the reality would still be the same. Mercedes would charge you for an expensive repair and fob replacement.

No need to split hairs on this here. The core question is how much of a duty does the manufacturer have to care about third party repairs and components. Established US case law says none. It is the job of the third party part maker to ensure their part meets 100% OEM standards and the job of the repair person to ensure they perform a repair equal to the OEM. If they can't they should refuse to perform the repair...

It would be like getting a part replaced at Auto Zone on your Mercedes and then complaining to Mercedes when the part fails because the Auto Zone tech wasn't able to install it correctly. Re-syncing the TouchID sensor is a key component of replacing it...

'Reality is shifting and Apple has no reason to care about third party repair'

THIS IS HOW YOU DEFEND APPLE COMMITTING VANDALISM?! Because that's what destroying people's property that they paid for amounts to.

Maybe they should run an underground drug operation ala Al Capone (Since alcohol is legal). After all, times are changing! people want drugs!

I'm sure you'd defend it too.

 

[Yojimbo007]

1st off.. The product is not self destructing..the owner is subjecting it to unauthorized parts and service/repair procedures!

To me it Sounds like a securty measure by Apple !
Ones id is at stake here .
Just add a little disclosure on the product ..

 

[kevinof]

Wrong.

It's the customers property, not Apples. They can do what they want with it and lose warranty, but what Apple can't do is destroy someone else's property. Here in the UK that's a criminal act.

 

[Ladybug]

'Reality is shifting and Apple has no reason to care about third party repair'

THIS IS HOW YOU DEFEND APPLE COMMITTING VANDALISM?! Because that's what destroying people's property that they paid for amounts to.

Maybe they should run an underground drug operation ala Al Capone (Since alcohol is legal). After all, times are changing! people want drugs!

I'm sure you'd defend it too.

I'm glad you brought up the vandalism aspect. I've been thinking the same thing since this all started. Vandalism is a crime in case anyone doesn't realize it. They can argue all the security aspects they want but it doesn't change the fact they destroyed property that does not belong to them.

Apple cashes in on this scheme in so many ways its not funny. First they sell you the device, cash in the bank. Secondly, they mandate after the point of sale that only Apple approved parts can run on these devices they no longer own, forcing you to pay yet again for repairs or by making you buy a new device. Lastly, they take whatever equity you have in your iPhone by ruining the ability to sell your device later on. Its a win, win, win as far as Apple is concerned.

How anyone can defend all this is beyond me.

 

[von franklin]

Almost seems like when you go to a cheap knock off place to get it don for Cheap thats what happens

 

[vertsix]

They should also get sued for letting iPhones brick themselves by changing the date to 1970.

 

[ddvalk]

I'm quite surprised how many people are supporting this unscrupulous behaviour. I recently changed my 6s Screen due to water damage (so no apple support) but I kept my original button. My phone works fine now.

This is the key: keep the same button. You should be just fine.

I'm curious, did you keep the same button on accident or did you know you needed to?

 

[codeoverride]

Seems like they have legit case.



There is a lot of misinformation on this subject. The "brick" happens when someone replaces the TouchID sensor--with a GENUINE OR 3rd party part. Apple is most likely within their right to disable TouchID when they detect a mismatched sensor as it's a security risk. However bricking the device and not giving any warning is probably going too far.

That's ridiculous. Why doesn't the phone disable the touch ID and ask for the password? Problem solved.

 

[AxoNeuron]

Nope. These are not simple parts anymore. You're not just replacing a transistor or a capacitor. There are many levels of technology involved, many of them for security reasons, and if you purchase a part that is not made by Apple and have it installed not by an authorized Apple repair center you run the risk of damaging your device. What I'm hearing here is that Apple should step in and reward customers for taking a huge risk and losing.

Ease of use, cost of repair and maintenance are all things we consider before every purchase. If having your iPhone fixed at an Apple store/repair center is too costly or out of reach (even by mail), well then there are many, many low cost Android options available. I just don't see where it's Apple's obligation to consider that I might wish to repair my phone with low quality parts by unqualified dudes and task engineers with making sure the OS will work if it detects any number of aftermarket parts.

"Apple must have known tens or hundreds of thousands of people would have non-official Touch ID sensors in their devices" - Are you kidding me? These are not off the shelf parts. These were designed with hardware and software for specific Apple devices. There is no reason at all for Apple to expect these would be out in the wild except unauthorized copies or parts that didn't pass q/a and went out the back door, and Apple is not in any way obligated to make sure their OS will work with them. They can't. They have no idea how these crap parts will even work or if they will work at all.

Man...people really will use some incredible mental gymnastics to go to the defense of Apple.

There is nothing wrong with repairing your device with parts that have not been personally blessed at the grave of Steve Jobs. I repaired my iPad recently with a third party display and it works fantastically.

If you're seriously trying to act like Apple just didn't have a choice here...you're wrong. Apple had plenty of choices that would still have maintained the security of their users WITHOUT completely screwing thousands of people without any warning. At the very least, Apple could have warned people, you can at least admit that.

 

[Tinmania]

But the cheap knockoff would likely not work with the immobilizer in the car, which means you wouldn't be able to start the car.

Yes I could. With THE KEY (hint: akin to passcode). Even my other car that has no visible keyholes to use on the doors, has one on the driver's door (hidden but accessible if need be). You can access it if the fob fails. Of course my car also has a keypad that is exactly like the passcode on an iphone and I would just use that instead.

Why is this such a difficult concept to grasp. Apple is wrong on this one, and will either bend or lose.


Mike

 

[C DM]

Yes I could. With THE KEY (hint: akin to passcode). Even my other car that has no visible keyholes to use on the doors, has one on the driver's door (hidden but accessible if need be). You can access it if the fob fails. Of course my car also has a keypad that is exactly like the passcode on an iphone and I would just use that instead.

Why is this such a difficult concept to grasp. Apple is wrong on this one, and will either bend or lose.


Mike

Again, while you could potentially open the door, you wouldn't be able to start the car if the immobilizer doesn't recognize the key/keyfob.

 

[Zellio]

Well, of course a standardized self-build PC is way more repairable and upgradable than a proprietary all-in-one Mac. This is Apples solution for offering PCI expansion slots on a Mac. It kind of looks as if the Mac is run by a small PC.

PC Does What?​

Meh, that's not really a good comparison. Thunderbolt isn't 'pci expansion', it's a much faster and better form of firewire. It's also on lots of pc motherboards.

I have 3 thunderbolt devices (Although to be fair, I got them all cheaply on ebay). A seagate portable thunderbolt dock, a seagate desktop dock, and this:

http://www.amazon.com/StarTech-com-...=1455339845&sr=8-18&keywords=thunderbolt+dock

Which I got on ebay for around $9-$19.99 (I forget) since it had no power supply and the seller couldn't test it. I was able to and voila! It worked. And I have no issues likesome of the buyers do.

Again, if I ever left the apple ecosystem my thunderbolt stuff would still work

 

[trifid]

Again, while you could potentially open the door, you wouldn't be able to start the car if the immobilizer doesn't recognize the key/keyfob.

Why do you keep insisting on keyless ignition cars? We are not talking about those. We are talking about cars with remote that let you open the door for convenience, that's it, same as touch-id, lets you open your phone for convenience. But the 'main' key is still a physical car key, or in the case of iPhone, the pin-code. Do you understand that?

Car remote -> open car, but if it's broken, you can still open car with physical key (this applies to 'mainstream cars', not keyless ignition cars)

Touch-id -> open iPhone, but if it's broken you should still be able open iphone with pin code.

 

[LV426]

Wrong.

It's the customers property, not Apples. They can do what they want with it and lose warranty, but what Apple can't do is destroy someone else's property. Here in the UK that's a criminal act.

Apple don't destroy the iPhone. Badly done repairs that don't follow the correct pairing procedure destroy the iPhone.

Apple could legitimately be criticised for failing to produce the error the first time the phone is rebooted after a botched repair.

 

[C DM]

Why do you keep insisting on keyless ignition cars? We are not talking about those. We are talking about cars with remote that let you open the door for convenience, that's it, same as touch-id, lets you open your phone for convenience. But the 'main' key is still a physical car key, or in the case of iPhone, the pin-code. Do you understand that?

Car remote -> open car, but if it's broken, you can still open car with physical key (this applies to 'mainstream cars', not keyless ignition cars)

Touch-id -> open iPhone, but if it's broken you should still be able open iphone with pin code.

Because we are not talking about keyless ignition, we are talking about the key also being used to start the car and not just open the doors. If you get just a random copy it might open the doors but won't start the car because of the immobilizer not recognizing not. The analogy is relating that to the home button assembly with Touch ID and Apple seemingly treating it as something that is more than simply something that just unlocks the phone but plays a bigger role as far as being part of a chain of authentication, in a sense of the car key playing a bigger role than just unlocking the doors but also being able to authenticate with the immobilizer and actually start the car.

 

[trifid]

Because we are not talking about keyless ignition, we are talking about the key also being used to start the car and not just open the doors. If you get just a random copy it might open the doors but won't start the car because of the immobilizer not recognizing not. The analogy is relating that to the home button assembly with Touch ID and Apple seemingly treating it as something that is more than simply something that just unlocks the phone but plays a bigger role as far as being part of a chain of authentication, in a sense of the car key playing a bigger role than just unlocking the doors but also being able to authenticate with the immobilizer and actually start the car.

No it doesn't, pin-code is primary, not touch-id, you can't do things like restart phone without pin, can you? Touch-id is a convenient secondary access method, same as remote.

 

[Nanotyrns]

It would be like getting a part replaced at Auto Zone on your Mercedes and then complaining to Mercedes when the part fails because the Auto Zone tech wasn't able to install it correctly. Re-syncing the TouchID sensor is a key component of replacing it...

BINGO. The cost of replacement/repair falls to the third-party repairman because he failed to re-sync the TouchID or did not know how.

Man...people really will use some incredible mental gymnastics to go to the defense of Apple.

There is nothing wrong with repairing your device with parts that have not been personally blessed at the grave of Steve Jobs. I repaired my iPad recently with a third party display and it works fantastically.

If you're seriously trying to act like Apple just didn't have a choice here...you're wrong. Apple had plenty of choices that would still have maintained the security of their users WITHOUT completely screwing thousands of people without any warning. At the very least, Apple could have warned people, you can at least admit that.

From the Apple warranty --


IMPORTANT: BY USING YOUR iPHONE, iPAD, iPOD or APPLE TV PRODUCT YOU ARE AGREEING TO BE BOUND BY THE TERMS OF THE APPLE ONE (1) YEAR LIMITED WARRANTY (“WARRANTY”) AS SET OUT BELOW.

DO NOT USE YOUR PRODUCT UNTIL YOU HAVE READ THE TERMS OF THE WARRANTY. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THE WARRANTY, DO NOT USE THE PRODUCT AND RETURN IT WITHIN THE RETURN PERIOD STATED IN APPLE’S RETURN POLICY (FOUND AT www.apple.com/legal/sales_policies/) TO THE APPLE OWNED RETAIL STORE OR THE AUTHORIZED DISTRIBUTOR WHERE YOU PURCHASED IT FOR A REFUND.

This Warranty does not apply:
c) to damage caused by use with a third party component or product that does not meet the Apple Product’s specifications
(f) to damage caused by service (including upgrades and expansions) performed by anyone who is not a representative of Apple or an Apple Authorized Service Provider (“AASP”);

Are you referring to that warning? Because there it is. I think it's the one most people click right by. They made a whole South Park episode about it.

It doesn't matter if you use a third party part and "it works fantastically" or not. If you roll the dice and lose, Apple isn't obligated to then replace/repair your device. You rolled and won. This time. Next time you might damage your iPad and if it still has a warranty, you've voided it. You agreed to those conditions when you powered it up and checked that little box.

 

[LV426]

You are talking about a hardware issue that is catastrophic and kills the device, not the same thing. An iPhone can function perfectly without the Touch ID enabled.

I don't want a device that bricks as soon as non critical components fail.

Security compromise = catastrophic. At least, in some people's eyes.

 

[Nanotyrns]

Again, while you could potentially open the door, you wouldn't be able to start the car if the immobilizer doesn't recognize the key/keyfob.

As much as I'm arguing they shouldn't, they almost certainly will. At the very least they will replace the part for nothing and get the phone working again, but for all that graciousness they will still be criticized bitterly for "allowing" it to happen in the first place. Because how dare they not anticipate my desire to buy a third party part made by God (Thor) knows who in God (Thor, again) knows where to use in my very well made, very expensive device.

 

[trifid]

BINGO. The cost of replacement/repair falls to the third-party repairman because he failed to re-sync the TouchID or did not know how.


From the Apple warranty --


IMPORTANT: BY USING YOUR iPHONE, iPAD, iPOD or APPLE TV PRODUCT YOU ARE AGREEING TO BE BOUND BY THE TERMS OF THE APPLE ONE (1) YEAR LIMITED WARRANTY (“WARRANTY”) AS SET OUT BELOW.

DO NOT USE YOUR PRODUCT UNTIL YOU HAVE READ THE TERMS OF THE WARRANTY. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THE WARRANTY, DO NOT USE THE PRODUCT AND RETURN IT WITHIN THE RETURN PERIOD STATED IN APPLE’S RETURN POLICY (FOUND AT www.apple.com/legal/sales_policies/) TO THE APPLE OWNED RETAIL STORE OR THE AUTHORIZED DISTRIBUTOR WHERE YOU PURCHASED IT FOR A REFUND.

This Warranty does not apply:
c) to damage caused by use with a third party component or product that does not meet the Apple Product’s specifications
(f) to damage caused by service (including upgrades and expansions) performed by anyone who is not a representative of Apple or an Apple Authorized Service Provider (“AASP”);

Are you referring to that warning? Because there it is. I think it's the one most people click right by. They made a whole South Park episode about it.

It doesn't matter if you use a third party part and "it works fantastically" or not. If you roll the dice and lose, Apple isn't obligated to then replace/repair your device. You rolled and won. This time. Next time you might damage your iPad and if it still has a warranty, you've voided it. You agreed to those conditions when you powered it up and checked that little box.

But note it says "This warranty does not apply:..." it doesn't say "This product will be bricked when..."

Warranty vs bricking are different.