Apple Releases Updated Version of iOS 9.2.1 to Fix Devices Bricked by 'Error 53'

[Agilis]

I was one of those who argued that what Apple was doing was right. I thought this issue was regarding the use of 3rd party hardware and Apple tightening up the security to prevent this. I was a victim of this issue because my cousin had this exact issue after the front display assembly was replaced by a third party and after updating to iOS 9, he received a "Connect to iTunes" screen on his phone which iTunes then reported as "Error 53". I ended up buying a replacement phone for my cousin.

Now again, I thought this issue was Apple preventing third party touch ID hardware from working which makes sense because I do not want knock off parts being used. I did not think 3rd party hardware could be used in the iPhone until today. So I admit I made a mistake but I had good reasons for thinking the way I did.

I'm happy for those who will be able to use their devices once again. I'm also happy Apple did what they did. I for one will be seeking reimbursement since I paid for a replacement phone.

 

[macintoshmac]

This is exactly what should have been done in the first place. Disable TouchID and leave the rest of the phone alone.

Disable Touch ID, ensure that a passcode is needed to access. That's it. But I see and like the height of security they take the device to. It was not intended to be repaired outside. When you do that, you risk a "security control", not a quality control per se, and I like that it was thought of. The current San Bernandino case, FBI could have just used a third party Touch ID component and get Touch ID to disable itself, and if the phone is left still open to Brute Force, they would take their time and crack it. We want that? Class Action Suit against Apple suggests that yes, we are okay with that.

People want iPhones. Then, they want their iPhones to be composed of the same components that are available with third party people because they want to be able to repair it for the cost of repair of any other phone out there. Then, they want Apple to be Apple, but not be Apple. Mankind is really funny at times.

I, for one, would really like it that no matter what, unless I want my phone to be accessible to people, no-one can take my phone and crack my data, right down to the point of using a different component in the phone and potentially circumventing a security feature. This is rather brilliant and forward thinking related to privacy for consumers, on part of Apple. Laud them for that.

Regarding criminals, it is not for Apple to help FBI crack the phone. It is for the FBI to instill the fear of life in the accused and get him to divulge the passcode. If the FBI were to say to the accused, look, if you ever want to live and keep breathing, in jail, tell us the passcode. We already have you, and we will chair you, if you dont tell. When you tell, you have a potential for life imprisonment. It was the FBI who should have cracked that password off the accused, not try to force Apple's hand that way.

 

[Agilis]

If it's possible to restore a bricked iPhone via a software update doesn't that mean the San Bernardino terrorist phone can be accessed through a special update? One that stays within the hands of Apple to avert the privacy concern. Can and should are to different issues.

The thing you are forgetting or not understanding is this update, for it to be installed by the iPhone, will require a passcode to be entered in on the iPhone, by iTunes, in order for the installation to be authorized. This maintains the security work flow Apple designed.

What the FBI is asking for however will break it. They are asking Apple to acknowledge the existence of software developed to by-pass that security workflow. In order for Apple to acknowledge that, they would need to develop it first, and hand something over to the FBI... Which now acknowledges the existence of software that can assist in unlocking anyone's phone.

This is the danger because it allows the government to ask Apple for this custom software whenever they "require" access to someone's phone. This also is bad for Apple because now a back-door exists for iPhones which hurts the public trust in Apple devices.

This sets forth a dangerous precedent.

 

[macintoshmac]

There are ways to get the accused to tell the password. Making Apple do something about it just makes FBI look like whiners. For God sake, hand over the accused to Israelis, they will surely not ask Apple for anything, they will make do with their own tactics.

 

[C DM]

There are ways to get the accused to tell the password. Making Apple do something about it just makes FBI look like whiners. For God sake, hand over the accused to Israelis, they will surely not ask Apple for anything, they will make do with their own tactics.

Not that this thread is about that, but who would they hand over exactly in this case?

 

[macintoshmac]

Not that this thread is about that, but who would they hand over exactly in this case?

"the accused". In generalisation, the point was that instead of going to a company and ask to create an intentionally insecure operating system so that it could be peeped into at will, it is better in the longer run to use tactics on the accused to divulge the passcode to you.

What the FBI is stupidly trying to do is really akin to saying that let's not make a secure safe that cannot be opened by anything other than its own key, because what if the key got lost and then we won't ever have access to what's inside?

In an example I find fits the privacy fight perfectly, banks provide lockers and customers are given keys. Now, there is one key with the customer and one with the bank, or as in some banks, there is only one key with the customer alone. Yet, stuff from lockers gets stolen. Why? Because apart from customer negligence (which is really beyond me), there exist keys to all lockers in the bank itself, there is no such thing as "only one key that was given to customers". The bank has a plea that what if the customer becomes a wilful defaulter and stops paying rent, so we have the option to take out the locker and close down the customer's services with us.

So.. when the FBI is given a generic platform to use, are they going to be "moral" about it? Has it ever happened that anyone in power remained moral? Apple, while has resorted to anything and everything for business and income, it is trying to be moral for its customers privacy, which is more than most other companies can say, which is more than ANYONE in the government can say for themselves. Everyone has THEIR own agendas, and it is mostly to just come in power. Apple has one agenda, which is to safeguard its customers' privacy with the side effect that customers will love them for this. Instead of lauding it, people are trying to squish it in the name of national interest. This is ironic and dare I say, quite autocratic in nature, not democratic.

 

[primorack]

Has anyone tried this. I got really great offer on iPhone with this error and I am considering buying it. Does it work?

 

[macintoshmac]

You can go ahead and buy it. Take the phone to the Apple Store and let them fix it. Or, meet the seller in an Apple Store and if the device is fixable, buy it then.

 

[MH01]

Has anyone tried this. I got really great offer on iPhone with this error and I am considering buying it. Does it work?

You can go ahead and buy it. Take the phone to the Apple Store and let them fix it. Or, meet the seller in an Apple Store and if the device is fixable, buy it then.

i suspect as soon as the seller realises that apple has released this fix, the value of the iPhone in question will rise dramatically from useless/bricked to functional without touch id .

so if you want a bargain buy it asap. And take it to apple yourself if there are issues with error 53 after the patch....

 

[Puonti]

Now waiting for complaints from people who buy a second-hand iDevice and later realize Touch ID is disabled due to a third-party component and this update.

Updated second-hand iDevice buyer's checklist:

1) Is Activation Lock disabled?

2) Does Touch ID work, if device has the hardware for it?

 

[kevinof]

Doesn't say a lot about the quality of Apple's software testing is a "Factory Test" can make it out in an IOS release. Very poor.

 

[apolloa]

Fact #1 : People, of their own free will, took their iPhones to unauthorized service centers, and engaged untrained personnel to install third-party, untested, unauthorized parts in their in-warranty and out-of-warranty iPhones.

Fact #2 : After installing system updates to their iPhones, people found out karma is a bitch by having their iPhones "bricked" (rendered non-operational by the use of unauthorized service centers, and engaging untrained personnel to install third-party, untested, unauthorized parts in their in-warranty and out-of-warranty iPhones) to protect and prevent their data from falling into unauthorized hands.

Fact #3 : Whiny, cry-bullies who didn't want to face the reality and total ramifications of the actions they took of their own free will started complaining to Apple about facts one and two.

Fact #4 : Emotional people who couldn't summon up a rational thought if their life depended on it took pity on the dumb masses, forcing the non-issue into the realm of the viral.

Fact #5 : Proving that not even Apple has a the resources to fight the power of stupid people in large groups, Apple rushes out an update to iOS 9.2.1, and starts paying to replace iPhones and third-party parts of the dumb masses, despite the fact of having absolutely no fault or liability in creating the situation in the first place.

Clearly - I have absolutely no grasp of the subject matter.
[doublepost=1455842436][/doublepost]

Actions, meet Consequences. Before you dive in there, Slugger, you should know Consequences can be a real bitch from time to time, know what I am saying here? Keep your head about you, and don't do anything I wouldn't do, Tiger !

Fact#6 No y8h do not have a clue about the situation and you are very rude and based all your comments on your personal opinions and not 'Fact'.
Just so you know Apple potentially breached UK law, where the story broke into the media first and was being threatened with UK court action as well as Us court action because it had potentially acted illegally. That's why they have backtracked and fixed the fault.

 

[attila]

Still no fix for the 1970 though....

It's terrible! How can I excursive my nostalgia trips on a flawed device? I'm planning to sue, you can join my cause!

 

[8692574]

Should have called it 9.2.2 or 9.2.1b no sense of having 2 version, now you do not know if you have the 9.2.1 or the 9.2.1 fixed.

It's a good thing that they fixed the bug, but should have got the x.x.2 name on it just to be clear.

 

[iKen1]

not over the air update? omg whyyyyyy

Surely that's obvious. The phone will not boot if you are getting Error 53. How would you suggest that you trigger a software update when the OS/WiFi isn't even running?

 

[iL15hts]

I have just sent my iPhone to apple because of this error 53

 

[JosephAW]

What? iOS 8 doesn't experience this problem so we don't need an update?

 

[DigitalVT]

Be careful peeps. Just plugged my plugged into my laptop (MBP) to charge and it asked me to install the update, I said yes. And it's gone into recovery mode and not looking like its going to come out of it any time soon!!

 

[8692574]

Be careful peeps. Just plugged my plugged into my laptop (MBP) to charge and it asked me to install the update, I said yes. And it's gone into recovery mode and not looking like its going to come out of it any time soon!!

Mine updated without problems, it was a breeze. In and out in a few mins.

 

[craig1410]

I really feel sorry for people who automatically assume the worst about a company in a situation like this and feel some sort of vindication when the company 'fesses up' or 'back-tracks' and issues an apology and a fix. These people never seem to consider the much more likely scenario that this was an unintended side-effect of a security feature and that Apple really don't gain anything by this whole situation.

Apple were not misleading anyone when they said this was a security feature to protect Touch ID. And just because they have developed an iOS release to fix it, that doesn't mean they were previously lying when they said there was no way to fix it. They have "developed" the fix over the last week or two. Anyone who thinks they should have done this sooner simply doesn't understand the complexities involved in releasing software to hundreds of millions of devices.

Think of first-aid where, if someone is choking on their food, you don't immediately cut open their throat to get the food out! First do no harm is the principle you need to follow! It's the same with software. Think of the damage that might be done if, while fixing this problem which only affects a small proportion of users, Apple inadvertently caused the touch ID sensor to accept anyone's fingerprint. It would destroy the reputation of security which Apple Pay currently enjoys and could potentially cost users a lot of money, not to mention allowing thieves and hackers to gain access to private data.

So next time you feel the need to jump on the passing bandwagon to criticise a company (or person) who is for the most part doing amazing, ground-breaking work, ask yourself if you are actually qualified to criticise them or not. If not then perhaps you should focus your energy on doing something amazing yourself and making a positive contribution to the world instead of trying to drag others down around you.

Just saying'

ps. I hope everyone directly affected manage to recover successfully and go on to enjoy their devices again.

 

[beanbaguk]

This is so un-Appley. But I like it.Also quite generous.

Really?! That's not "generous". It's just morally right to do so.

Apple are a lot of things but generous is certainly not one of them

 

[69Mustang]

Fact #1 : People, of their own free will, took their iPhones to unauthorized service centers, and engaged untrained personnel to install third-party, untested, unauthorized parts in their in-warranty and out-of-warranty iPhones.

Yes they did. You made up that part about untrained personnel. Empirical evidence would suggest the opposite since the phones were repaired to the customer's satisfaction.

Fact #2 : After installing system updates to their iPhones, people found out karma is a bitch by having their iPhones "bricked" (rendered non-operational by the use of unauthorized service centers, and engaging untrained personnel to install third-party, untested, unauthorized parts in their in-warranty and out-of-warranty iPhones) to protect and prevent their data from falling into unauthorized hands.

Your fact 2 is just... wow... an insult to the word fact. Conveniently, you ignore the fact the customers phones work. That's the goal of any repair. Then you make up stuff, ignoring the fact that Error-53 has nothing to do with unauthorized parts. As Apple explained, it's test code that unfortunately made it onto consumer hardware. That fantasy stuff you made up about preventing data from falling in unauthorized hands? Not true either.

Fact #3 : Whiny, cry-bullies who didn't want to face the reality and total ramifications of the actions they took of their own free will started complaining to Apple about facts one and two.

You don't have any facts in one and two.

Fact #4 : Emotional people who couldn't summon up a rational thought if their life depended on it took pity on the dumb masses, forcing the non-issue into the realm of the viral.

The viral nature of the issue got Apple to correct errant software. Your quip about rational thought is "pot meet kettle" considering what you've written so far on this topic.

Fact #5 : Proving that not even Apple has a the resources to fight the power of stupid people in large groups, Apple rushes out an update to iOS 9.2.1, and starts paying to replace iPhones and third-party parts of the dumb masses, despite the fact of having absolutely no fault or liability in creating the situation in the first place.

I think what you meant to say is Apple stepped up and corrected their software. Since they were at fault for leaving testing code in it. Code that Apple says should have never been customer facing. They created the problem, they fixed the problem.

Clearly - I have absolutely no grasp of the subject matter.

This is my absolute favorite part of your quote. Your valiant attempt at sarcasm is admirable. It's also deliciously, and ironically accurate. You truly have absolutely no grasp of the subject matter.

 

[C DM]

"the accused". In generalisation, the point was that instead of going to a company and ask to create an intentionally insecure operating system so that it could be peeped into at will, it is better in the longer run to use tactics on the accused to divulge the passcode to you.

What the FBI is stupidly trying to do is really akin to saying that let's not make a secure safe that cannot be opened by anything other than its own key, because what if the key got lost and then we won't ever have access to what's inside?

In an example I find fits the privacy fight perfectly, banks provide lockers and customers are given keys. Now, there is one key with the customer and one with the bank, or as in some banks, there is only one key with the customer alone. Yet, stuff from lockers gets stolen. Why? Because apart from customer negligence (which is really beyond me), there exist keys to all lockers in the bank itself, there is no such thing as "only one key that was given to customers". The bank has a plea that what if the customer becomes a wilful defaulter and stops paying rent, so we have the option to take out the locker and close down the customer's services with us.

So.. when the FBI is given a generic platform to use, are they going to be "moral" about it? Has it ever happened that anyone in power remained moral? Apple, while has resorted to anything and everything for business and income, it is trying to be moral for its customers privacy, which is more than most other companies can say, which is more than ANYONE in the government can say for themselves. Everyone has THEIR own agendas, and it is mostly to just come in power. Apple has one agenda, which is to safeguard its customers' privacy with the side effect that customers will love them for this. Instead of lauding it, people are trying to squish it in the name of national interest. This is ironic and dare I say, quite autocratic in nature, not democratic.

So basically in this particular case none of that would actually apply or help.
[doublepost=1455893066][/doublepost]

Fact#6 No y8h do not have a clue about the situation and you are very rude and based all your comments on your personal opinions and not 'Fact'.
Just so you know Apple potentially breached UK law, where the story broke into the media first and was being threatened with UK court action as well as Us court action because it had potentially acted illegally. That's why they have backtracked and fixed the fault.

Is that last part also factual or just a personal opinion?
[doublepost=1455893290][/doublepost]

Should have called it 9.2.2 or 9.2.1b no sense of having 2 version, now you do not know if you have the 9.2.1 or the 9.2.1 fixed.

It's a good thing that they fixed the bug, but should have got the x.x.2 name on it just to be clear.

You don't need to know which one you have--if your device is working fine then you don't need anything since you are either on the latest version and don't have the issue (and don't need that specific fix) or you are not on the latest and will get the latest with the fix whenever you decided to upgrade. And if you are affected by the issue, then you can only restore via iTunes anyway which will pull the latest version with the fix to get things working for you.
[doublepost=1455893352][/doublepost]

What? iOS 8 doesn't experience this problem so we don't need an update?

If you are affected you'd need to restore via iTunes anyway which would pull the latest version with the fix and install that for you.

 

[8692574]

You don't need to know which one you have--if your device is working fine then you don't need anything since you are either on the latest version and don't have the issue (and don't need that specific fix) or you are not on the latest and will get the latest with the fix whenever you decided to upgrade.

And yet if i plug my perfectly fine iPhone i get prompted to update.... and should not since my iPhone is not affected, hence the need for a x.x.2 update (i don't see the problem with having a x.x.x).

EDIT:
Also if I buy a used phone now i know right from the firmware if it has a proper part or not, if it has the .x.2 update it might have a non standard part, if it has a x.x.1 i know for sure if it is working that it is genuine without a different firmware version number i cannot know (i know i know my argument won't be valid once 9.3 is released).

 

[C DM]

And yet if i plug my perfectly fine iPhone i get prompted to update.... and should not since my iPhone is not affected, hence the need for a x.x.2 update (i don't see the problem with having a x.x.x).

EDIT:
Also if I buy a used phone now i know right from the firmware if it has a proper part or not, if it has the .x.2 update it might have a non standard part, if it has a x.x.1 i know for sure if it is working that it is genuine without a different firmware version number i cannot know (i know i know my argument won't be valid once 9.3 is released).

If it was released as 9.2.2 you'd be promoted to update as well then as would everyone else even though a very very small number of people actually need it. So in the sense of being prompted to update it seems it would be even worse if .2 was released as everyone would be promoted to do it even though most don't need it.

As for parts, iOS versions aren't there to be used as indicators of hardware, so that's rather moot as well.