Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Facing Class Action Lawsuit Over 'Error 53' iPhone 6 Bricking
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Monotonously. Somebody that doesn’t get it.
[doublepost=1455253855][/doublepost]
Enough to get the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission looking at it. I suspect they’re not all forum members or geeks either.
As far as I know new cars don't have after market computers... So you have to buy OEM.... Same with body work...
So the car analogy works just accept it dude. You ruin your car that's your fault. You ruin your phone that's also your fault. Installing something on your own has risks and those people took the risk, when they should have sent it in for repair and had it done correctly.
For all we know, checking the state of the TouchID is impossible during runtime of iOS due to sand boxing or whatever. Either way Apple detected something that look suspicious so it shut the phone down... Makes sense to me. I'd want my car to not start is the full injectors were faulty... A component like the TouchID is pretty complex, it's not a simple but and buoy fix like changing brakes... Same with a new cars computer.
The car analogy is solid.
How do people sensors break in the first place? Water damage? I highly doubt a lot of people are affected by this.
What's really import is to not buy knock off sensors (reverse engineered ones) or damaged ones from some salvage place where kids just rip them out of used phones. That's like going to a salvage yard ripping a computer from a car and installing it, then complaining to the dealer your car doesn't start...
Apple likely had this software check in for awhile and now people are seeing it in action. I don't think they purposefully flipped a kill switch.
Honestly bud, it's okay to be wrong sometimes. Obstinate and wrong just takes the enjoyment out topics. Nothing I can say will help you see how...
I give. You win.
New anything rarely has aftermarket parts it takes time. There are some tuners that pretty much re-write the ECU which in my book makes it an aftermarket computer. Your car analogy fails.
If your car, phone, toaster, house is broken by an aftermarket part it very much depends what happens after that point. Imagine getting a key cut and finding the guy on the market stall didn’t cut it correctly. You would expect only that door to lose functionality rather than the heating shutting down and all the steel window shutters closing. Right or wrong?
You are assuming the sensor is knock off also. Maybe it isn’t.
Maybe, (as with cars), the sensor comes from the same factory as the original.
See for all of you hypocrites. I’m under the assumption that when you have your car/boiler/Air con/Washing Machine/etc. etc. serviced you always call the OEM and use their parts right?
I hope so.
If it is "to protect the secure enclave", that can be solved by simply erasing/invalidating the secure enclave and starting fresh. Users would need to re-configure touch ID and re-enter PIN codes to reconstruct this new secure enclave. In any case touch ID is a secondary security measure in iOS, and the PIN code can always override it.
If it is "to protect the secure enclave", that can be solved by simply erasing/invalidating the secure enclave and starting fresh. Users would need to re-configure touch ID and re-enter PIN codes to reconstruct this new secure enclave. In any case touch ID is a secondary security measure in iOS, and the PIN code can always override it.
It's the other way around.
If what Apple says it's true (that a new sensor could compromise private data) it designed a security system with a vulnerability and by bricking phones it is preventing that vulnerability from happening.
Or maybe the bricking is unintentional which is even worse.
Adding security checks and ways to handle them down the line doesn't on its own indicate anything in particular.
Actually I disagree with your thinking here. By having the phone be altered in any way, regardless of warranty, it puts the original manufacturer in a position of not being able to hold up their end of being able to make exceptions due to their inability to just get it fixed properly.
Case and point: as a former FRS (mobile tech) there was a customer who would bring his iPhone in with a "broken" home button. As it turned out, he frequently visited the store. We let him do it several times, then after seeing his repeated visits. He was tampering with the phone by going in and disconnecting it himself in order to get a new phone. I'm pretty sure he was selling them.
We finally had to tell him that we couldn't do anymore after that one.
It really isn't security if it can be bypassed by NOT updating the OS or NOT restoring the OS.
I'm pretty sure it's a bug and the bricking is unintentional. Apple will not let an iOS app get out of it's sandbox or use the mic without asking the user, it makes no sense that it would damage private property without even some sort of notice in advance.
Of course it's better for Apple to be seen as a security paranoid than a company destroying phones with bugs... but if the bricking was indeed an intentional security measure it would have been implemented from the start of TouchID.
You have a point, but your scenario is too simplistic. In order to deactivate Touch ID, you have to type in your pass code first. Let's get back to the issue. When a someone services the phone with the Touch ID active, and it senses that the communication to the Touch ID has been momentarily disrupted. The phone doesn't know that the user just wants repair its screen. It must assume that someone is trying to tamper with the Touch ID or its cable.
Now you can argue that preventing the user from logging back into their phone is too extreme, a point that I subscribe to by the way. I believe that Apple made the correct security decision, but implemented it very poorly. It would have been better if the phone simply disabled both Touch ID and Apple Pay, and allow the user to unlock their phone with just the pass code. It is clear that Apple did not put too much thought into the implementation of this fail safe protocol, which is sadly yet another example of the deteriorating state of Apple software. Apple Music anyone. Sorry, I am still sore from Apple Music destroying my music library.
Then it looks even worse on the part of Apple.
If they know what the phone is supposed to do and have been aware that this doesn’t actually happen they could have said as much. This is the typical keep quiet tactic by Apple and it’s beginning to **** off even their loyal users.
This would make sense if the phone error53ed on boot up after parts replacement but it doesn't. As it stands error53 offers no protection unless the nefarious secure enclave raiders do an OS update.
But your right about one thing "People will always see what they want to see though, I suppose."
Last edited:
Perhaps the additional check and the consequences weren't added until a later update, or perhaps the way it works isn't something that can be done with a typical boot process and can only happen during the update/restore process that perhaps involves more lower level operations?
Touch ID has "access" to the secure enclarve. It's not just that one needs to think about unlocking the phone and that you anyway need the passcode and that Touch ID is just optional.
With an manipulated Touch ID hardware one could do a lot of things with the information one can get with Touch ID. Even just disabling it could not be enough anymore.
However, in any case Apple should have informed clearly what they will do and why they will do it.
With an manipulated Touch ID hardware one could do a lot of things with the information one can get with Touch ID. Even just disabling it could not be enough anymore.
However, in any case Apple should have informed clearly what they will do and why they will do it.
"Perhaps" you are right however it doesn't alter the fact that the whole process fails as a so called security feature.
Well, more security is better than less security, even if neither are perfect security.
Even IF Apple had no choice but to brick these devices for security reasons (which I find, as a software developer, to be almost completely unbelievable), they should have at least warned people about it. But they didnt. And they could have easily included a check during the update to pop up an alert if a non-matching touch ID sensor was detected, but they didn't do that either.
I hope Apple loses these case, badly. There are SO many things they could have done here to prevent this issue that I almost have to think they're legitimately stupid for going the route they've chosen.
I hope Apple loses these case, badly. There are SO many things they could have done here to prevent this issue that I almost have to think they're legitimately stupid for going the route they've chosen.
A DVD-drive and the Touch ID sensor are different though and considering Touch ID is linked to a service that handles real money for people, I think Apple cares more about the security of Touch ID than it does a DVD-drive.
But why does this only happen when the user update? Perhaps if you clone or modify your own Touch ID sensor you can have it inject a malicious script during a firmware update and bypass the fingerprint requirement for a matching fingerprint. So, fraud perhaps? But who? The user or the third-party display vendor or the display manufacturers?
Did I take this too far?
So following your logic, even when your warranty expires after one/two years, you STILL wouldnt be able to have your iphone fixed at a non-official apple repair store? And a decision, to void warranty by going to a non-official apple repair shop, is TOTALLY up to the owner of the phone and that decision should NOT and can not be punished by apple. If you want a cheaper repair and dont need warranty anymore its totally up to you, and not Apple. And yes, in this case Apple DOES owe them a lot. It owes them a compensation for a new phone, since Apple deliberately and knowingly made their phone useless without warning the user anywhere what might happen in this case scenario, and they owe them compensation for all the lost data since, yet again, users havent been warned anywhere what might happen to their phone. You should really stop defending Apple on this one because what Apple did is a dick and childish move and should be punished by lawsuits AND by anti-trust penalites. 5 million isnt enough, they need to add at least two more zeros so Apple will think about it the next time before they do a retarded thing like that again.
"Apple Hit With Class Action Lawsuit Over Ease of Hacking Due to Easily Replaceable Touch ID" is what it would read if Apple had made it possible to replace the Touch ID with some after market crap.
There was a Bloom County strip once where Steve Dallas decided to sue Nikon because they failed to put a warning on cameras not to take pictures of Sean Penn. I think he reasoned that he shouldn't sue Opus because "NEVER, NEVER, NEVER SUE POOR PEOPLE" whereas Nikon had gobs of cash.
A non-authorized repair shop bricked some phones by using a probably 'out the back door' Touch ID (as they are not just available to anyone to use for repair) and they didn't have the knowledge or ability to properly sync the new part to the secure enclave. THIS MUST BE APPLE'S FAULT for not making it possible to repair a $600 phone with the cheapest parts possible.
There was a Bloom County strip once where Steve Dallas decided to sue Nikon because they failed to put a warning on cameras not to take pictures of Sean Penn. I think he reasoned that he shouldn't sue Opus because "NEVER, NEVER, NEVER SUE POOR PEOPLE" whereas Nikon had gobs of cash.
A non-authorized repair shop bricked some phones by using a probably 'out the back door' Touch ID (as they are not just available to anyone to use for repair) and they didn't have the knowledge or ability to properly sync the new part to the secure enclave. THIS MUST BE APPLE'S FAULT for not making it possible to repair a $600 phone with the cheapest parts possible.