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

[cdmoore74]

Totally justified lawsuit. There is absolutely no reason to brick the phone for an optional feature such as touchid. Invalidate the fingerprints and allow the user to continue using the phone via the regular pin.

This times a million. Regular pin was not compromised and I'm betting that the software wizards can just make the phone behave like any other iPhone without TouchID. I smell nothing but a money grab here.
[doublepost=1455249512][/doublepost]

another bogus suit with no merit

I fully disagree. Apple provided no warning and it caused damage to property. If anything this lawsuit makes the most sense compared to the others. If Apple can brick phones on purpose they can disable TouchID and force PIN's as the only option. I would still prevent Apple Pay from working but at least you still have a phone. Or at minimum give people the option of getting the phone repaired with proof of purchase.

 

[lampwins]

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

It serves to keep whatever hardware that may have been installed from accessing the secure enclave.

 

[Rogifan]

Isnt it illegal to force a consumer to use only parts manufactured by your own company? I don't even think you can void a warranty for doing so. And no it doesn't matter that its their company policy or that you agreed to the terms. The courts don't bother with company policy when the policy is against the laws policy.

I bought a soda charger a while back and it requires a specific brand of c02 cartridges. Is that considered illegal? Are there all kinds of companies out there manufacturing generic Touch ID sensors/home buttons? If there are I'd love to know who those manufacturers are. I know I wouldn't want my home button/Touch ID sensor replaced with something different than what Apple uses.

Apple is getting a lot of bad press from this.. Either way they come out looking like the bad guys on this..

The right thing to do is disable the touch ID, not brick the whole phone. Then offer a realistic replacement price. I think they will do something like this, only after a lot of bad press. Shame the only person who can make Tim move quickly on issues is taylor swift...

Taylor is Tim's executive coach!

So how many people have been affected by this. I know it's received a lot of ink especially in the UK press and on rumor sites like this but that doesn't mean it's a widespread issue.

 

[lampwins]

That's some statement. I would actually like some cryptographic proof that my fingerprint is not being sent off the device, if they are so concerned about protecting the privacy of "stupid" users like me.

Perhaps if you googled the proof you mentioned you wanted, you would see that many tests have in fact been preformed, all of them negative.

 

[69Mustang]

Seems fairly analogous--as in similar in concept, not similar in specifics/details: a replacement of an integral part of the car, a software update, an important incompatibility between what is addressed in the update and the replacement part, and some sort of a resulting consequence. Now, again, the importance and details of the incompatibility can certainly be questioned, just as the resulting consequence.

C DM I'd love to discuss the particulars of the actual topic. I do believe it can be accomplished without analogies, especially car analogies. The fundamental portions of your analogy that you seem to overlook is car updates to work that way. I'm sorry, they just don't. With an update to a car, a diagnostic analysis is performed first. Any aftermarket part would be identified. Prior to any work being done, the ramifications of the aftermarket part would be discussed by the dealer and the customer. An agreed upon resolution would be reached before any work would be done. None of that is applicable with Error-53. I do genuinely appreciate the discourse.

 

[C DM]

C DM I'd love to discuss the particulars of the actual topic. I do believe it can be accomplished without analogies, especially car analogies. The fundamental portions of your analogy that you seem to overlook is car updates to work that way. I'm sorry, they just don't. With an update to a car, a diagnostic analysis is performed first. Any aftermarket part would be identified. Prior to any work being done, the ramifications of the aftermarket part would be discussed by the dealer and the customer. An agreed upon resolution would be reached before any work would be done. None of that is applicable with Error-53. I do genuinely appreciate the discourse.

Well, I was originally responding to your original mention of car analogies. And again as analogies go they are there for concept similarities/comparisons, going into actual details and specifics wouldn't really ever hold up unless they weren't really analogies but actual direct comparisons. So realistically either analogies are used and accepted as conceptual comparisons or if specificity is desired then there's really no room for analogies and no need to employ them. It seems like usually things head down the path of the latter simply because people end up going into the specifics no matter what.

 

[trifid]

If the programming of that key is also used to authenticate you to the car, let's say to start it, then you'd seemingly have issues with that too.

Mine doesn't, same as all the mainstream Toyota/Honda/Ford as far as I know, the remote is for purely convenience, an optional access method, not primary, same as touch-id

 

[C DM]

Mine doesn't, same as all the mainstream Toyota/Honda/Ford as far as I know, the remote is for purely convenience, an optional access method, not primary, same as touch-id

And many cars that have push button ignitions on the other hand don't even employ a key.

 

[Dominicanyor]

Apple has law suits left and right!!

 

[ThunderSkunk]

Odds of "buy a new phone" resulting in an android sale? Pretty good I'd bet.

Great way to lose customers for life.

 

[trifid]

And many cars that have push button ignitions on the other hand don't even employ a key.

So would you agree my analogy is valid ONLY with those cars that don't have push button ignition, ie those cars where the remote is just for convenience but not mandatory? If so, my analogy is good right? Because similarly, touch-id is also for convenience, not mandatory

 

[cdmoore74]

It serves to keep whatever hardware that may have been installed from accessing the secure enclave.

You mean to tell me that you can't make a iPhone 5S, 6 or 6S turn into a iPhone without TouchID via software? Do pins share the same dumping box with our fingerprints?
And don't home buttons go bad from time to time? Apple should have clearly stated that unauthorized replacement of the TouchID equipped home button will result in a unrecoverable error 53 for security measures back with the iPhone 5S was released. Not over 2 years later.
And while their at it Apple better let people know if jailbreaking phones, replacing displays or batteries will trip e-fuses. I jailbroke my device one time months ago and did not like it so I went back to stock. Now I'm afraid that Apple has a way of finding out. Wouldn't be surprised if they flip a kill switch on me. If that happens the 6S would be my last Apple device.

 

[69Mustang]

I bought a soda charger a while back and it requires a specific brand of c02 cartridges. Is that considered illegal? Are there all kinds of companies out there manufacturing generic Touch ID sensors/home buttons? If there are I'd love to know who those manufacturers are. I know I wouldn't want my home button/Touch ID sensor replaced with something different than what Apple uses.

Initially no, it would not be illegal because the cartridge could have a unique shape. If an alternate manufacturer either creates new cartridges with the same functionality and shape, or recycles cartridges from the creator of your soda charger, then it can be illegal. There are steps involved to prove illegality.
I don't know if there's a generic home button manufacturer, but we don't know if the replacement home button was generic. People are assuming it was. To base the premise of your point on that assumption is foundationally unsound. It could have been re-used from another iPhone. That would make it 100% OEM. In this case it wouldn't have mattered. From what I've gathered it wouldn't matter. Replacement or OEM is immaterial to Error-53. It the validation that's important. That validation is home button A on iPhone A is tied to Secure Enclave A. If I replace home button A with home button B on iPhone A there will be an invalid connection with SE A. Bricked iPhone.

Focusing on the replacement home button is a rabbit hole to nowhere. It didn't brick the phone and Error-53 didn't act as a security wall in that instance. The guys phone worked fine for approx. 4 months.
In my opinion, this would have never been a problem if Apple did the following:
-Caused Touch ID to be inoperable when the replacement part was installed.
-Pop up notifying customer unauthorized part detected which disables Touch ID. Contact Apple for support.
-Leave the rest of the phone alone.

Bricking a customer's phone because of an optional feature should not have even been within the realm of possibility. You've asked how many people this has affected. I guarantee it's affected more people than there have been compromised Touch ID access. Afaik, that particular number is 0.

 

[C DM]

So would you agree my analogy is valid ONLY with those cars that don't have push button ignition, ie those cars where the remote is just for convenience but not mandatory? If so, my analogy is good right? Because similarly, touch-id is also for convenience, not mandatory

Similar programming/hardware can be present in the remote or the key itself to authenticate you with the car in order for the ignition to start--basically the concept behind the immobilizer.

 

[unknownbeing]

This wasn't the case with iOS 8. I work at a repair shop and since iOS 9 came out users started getting these errors.

 

[charlituna]

and then Apple pushes update to 9.3 to disable error and everything goes away.

no in this case. Not if the rumors are true. see one of the big differences between a third party display repair and an official one is that Apple tech runs all phones through a calibration system. the rumor among actual retail staff (according to my BF who is a genius) is that part of that calibration is flashing updated firmware linking the logic board and new touch ID together. And the only way to get that updated software is via calibration. It's not part of the firmware that might be updated in an iOS update or restore. And when an update is done the phone during install tries to read the firmware and the mismatch because it wasn't calibration causes the system to freak out and brick.

 

[macfacts]

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?

The iPhones that used 3rd party repairs did not brick right away. They work fine for months until Apple decides to check when the user updates the iOS or does a restore, then it bricks.

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.

Read the 4th paragraph of the Macrumors story. It explains it is not a security risk because the iPhones work perfectly fine until Apple checks for "fake" parts during an iOS update/restore. All a hacker has to do is not update and it won't brick and the hacker can use "fake" touch id sensors to steal all the data on the iPhone.

It's more like a car not starting because you tried a cheap knockoff key.

Not even close. The iPhones work after the 3rd party repairs. They iPhone only bricks if you update/restore iOS.

It is more like using a cheap knockoff key that works perfectly fine until you go in for a free oil change and the dealership decides to destroy your engine because they saw you used a "fake" key instead of buying a genuine key.

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.
...

Pretty weak security if all you have to do to bypass it is NOT update the OS or restore the OS on the iPhone.

 

[charlituna]

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.

my boyfriend is an apple store genius and according to him they have never had this error come up when it wasn't a 3rd party part. He doesn't know of any store that has had the error occur and when the phone was checked it was a legit part. So he's not convinced that a genuine part would cause an issue. but he will admit that he's never seen a genuine part not done by an apple tech (i.e. from a frankensteined phone that transferred a legit part from some other phone)

You can get proper fix from Apple. Not sure what you mean.

in theory. Seems to me that folks are pissed because they either didn't have a backup which has always been in the terms as 'not Apple's issue' or the 'can not restore' prompted a component check to make sure the logic board wasn't swapped etc and the tech found a 3rd party screen which is cause to refuse all service including paid due to device tampering.

I would absolutely believe this.

If so, though, Apple really should put out some kind of statement on this rather than just having people have to guess what the reasoning is.

unless some judge tells them its illegal not to give the exact answer they won't. To them it would be revealing internal IP and creating a security risk. The last thing they want is for folks to know exactly how the system works so they can try to hack it.

 

[maxsix]

Nothing truly surprising, arrogant and narcissistic as usual, Apple's elitist attitude and refusal to freely communicate with the public is their default stance. One that frustrates many customers to the point of striking back.

Some users that submit to Apple's obsession with control over them, may not realize they don't have to accept being treated so poorly. Yet some as we see in their posts here are comfortable with the role as lower class citizens. Defending Apple as though it's family, they seem very happy.

 

[69Mustang]

Well, I was originally responding to your original mention of car analogies. And again as analogies go they are there for concept similarities/comparisons, going into actual details and specifics wouldn't really ever hold up unless they weren't really analogies but actual direct comparisons. So realistically either analogies are used and accepted as conceptual comparisons or if specificity is desired then there's really no room for analogies and no need to employ them. It seems like usually things head down the path of the latter simply because people end up going into the specifics no matter what.

Fair enough. I just think people, in this forum in particular, should avoid car analogies. We've proven we don't do them properly. Primarily due to lack of auto industry knowledge. It's all good. Still enjoy the discourse.

 

[charlituna]

Nothing truly surprising, arrogant and narcissistic as usual, Apple's elitist attitude and refusal to freely communicate with the public is their default stance. One that frustrates many customers to the point of striking back.

what amazes me is the number of folks that claim to be so pissed about how Apple is like this, has been like this for years, and yet they continue to buy Apple products. If it really bugs you that much why haven't you gone somewhere else.

 

[macfacts]

This is like installing a new ignition or automatic starter for your car, on your own, then complaining your car won't start... The engine isnt broken... Install a new OEM part correctly and it works again....

Read the Macrumors story again, the fixed iPhones work fine for months until the user decides to update or restore iOS.

Your analogy is flawed because you say "the car won't start" but the fixed iPhones do start and work.

If the iPhones bricked right away after the unauthorized repair, people would blame the repair man and Apple's excuse of security would be believable.

 

[btrach144]

You're right, this is the time that you go to Apple and say, sync my damn sensor and flash the phone so I can use it again.

Or they can go to Apple and say:

MacRumors has, however, heard from a retail source that certain Apple Stores have received the go ahead from Apple to replace third-party screens and other components to resolve the issue. It is not yet clear if this replacement policy will be extended to all Apple Stores or if Apple will make an official comment on the situation.

Reading is hard

 

[charlituna]

Or they can go to Apple and say:

MacRumors has, however, heard from a retail source that certain Apple Stores have received the go ahead from Apple to replace third-party screens and other components to resolve the issue.

My boyfriend just came home from work and he's in LA which is a common market for such 'certain stores' and they have gotten no such instruction.

and frankly he's not sure doing a screen repair would even fix it. they have to be able to calibrate the new screen and if it's well and truly bricked that would likely fail.

You're right, this is the time that you go to Apple and say, sync my damn sensor and flash the phone so I can use it again.

my boyfriend says he's only ever seen 3rd party screens turn up with this message. which means it's not eligible for any service so no they wouldn't do it. And as it's not got an apple registered part serial the system likely wouldn't work with it anyway

I believe the guy who tried to get his iphone repaired passed his warranty time. Ethic wise, it's wrong to brick someone's phone just because this person needed to get his phone fix.

apple does do out of warranty repairs. so being over a year old isn't an excuse from not going to Apple. Most folks that go 3rd party are just cheap asses

 

[maxsix]

what amazes me is the number of folks that claim to be so pissed about how Apple is like this, has been like this for years, and yet they continue to buy Apple products. If it really bugs you that much why haven't you gone somewhere else.

To clarify, my opening comment was "Nothing surprising"

Having been an Apple customer, enthusiast and shareholder since 1991, no where does it say you have to love this company to do business with them.

During the "Apple Computer" days they were quite good. Not without issues like any company, but not as secretive, not as hypocritical, and truly open to working with customers that got faulty products. I've always been a very high volume buyer, year after year after year. So the point being I've gone through a lot of product. I enjoyed years of buying the latest Macs, PowerBook, then MacBook Pro models. Not until 2005 did I experience a true decline in quality control and other issues with Apple peripherals etc

I don't hate them either, simply sharing observations, it's as simple as that.