Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
To all those people using the TERRIBLE analogy of car parts, you clearly don't understand that a CAR does not store banking information, personal photos, a secure wallet, myriad logins for almost anything you can imagine...

TERRIBLE, laughable analogy - go back to analogy school and make up a better one. :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: igorsky and LV426
Who is "they"? The user, or Apple?

If you mean the user, yes, but the USER is not in control of how the chain of trust remainds locked and secure, iOS and its protocols and encryption - both in hardware and software - are. It is abundantly clear that you, and most of the other people complaining about this "Error 53" issue, do not understand what a chain of trust IS, and just want to voice your discontent, and whether or not that comes across as uninformed, you seem not to care.
What website did you just read all that crap off from? I can disable all encryption/security on my phone if I wish to.
They meaning Apple. If they(Apple) can secure the phone by locking it using software they can secure the touchID by locking only the touchID using software. At worst lock the phone until the user verifies his Apple ID. If I want to risk my precious fingerprints by acknowledging the replacement part through my passcode/Apple Id that should be up to me. You forget that touchID is a convenience feature and not the top security measure of your phone. Your passcode will always trump touchID.
 
So, according to this logic, if you take your new Lexus to a non-dealership repair shop and they put non-factory aftermarket replacement parts on your car, Lexus is liable when something goes wrong?

Thats not what he said. If you actually read his reply without your apple bias you would see the logic in his reply. Apple can not stop you from using 3rd party parts in the device you purchased. With that said, the 3rd party touch ID sensors are not broken, the error 53 is not because of damage the 3rd party part caused. It is all about apple blocking the 3rd party part with the iOS update. That is BS! And any honest person would have to agree. Apple should have built in the iOS upgrade block as to prevent the brick of the phone. At least the owner would still be able to use his or her iPhone. I get why apple is blocking the part due to security, but there were much better ways to do so.

If the 3rd party part caused damage, in no way should apple be liable or responsible. So your logic would apply.

If you purchased after market parts for your Lexus which caused no damage, but which Lexus did not approve of, and Lexus renders your car immobile, you would be just as upset. Thats what we have here. An aftermarket part that worked fine on one OS, but was rendered a brick once updated to the new OS. And that sir is BS.
 
Apple doesn't render your device useless, the repair guy does by replacing a critical security element the wrong way. It's exactly the aforementioned risk you take by choosing unauthorized repair. And yes idiots, we have manufacturer authorized service providers for a reason.
Right. Every single repair done by a third party repair person, no matter what the parts they used, was done incorrectly. Apple had nothing to do with it whatsoever. Do you honestly believe that?
 
They meaning Apple. If they can secure the phone by locking it using software they can secure the touchID by locking only the touchID using software. At worst lock the phone until the user verifies his Apple ID. If I want to risk my precious fingerprints by acknowledging the replacement part through my passcode/Apple Id that should be up to me. You forget that touchID is a convenience feature and not the top security measure of your phone. Your passcode will always trump touchID.

A password/security question can leak, and FAR more easily than your fingerprint, which requires your PHYSICAL presence. You choose to use a device implementing TouchID? Deal with it.



You seem to know NOT A LOT about this, because if you did, you wouldn't be giving these erroneous replies. You are using a platform DESIGNED BY APPLE - you are using their software UNDER LICENCE - you don't get to tell Apple how to run THEIR SECURITY MODEL, you merely own the PHYSICAL HARDWARE, not the way security is implemented, using it. If don't like VERY tight security, maybe you enjoy risking YOUR information, so, call Apple and ask them to design a PERSONALISED iPhone with special security holes which allow knock-off secure chain part swaps, then get back to us and tell us how it went.
 
  • Like
Reactions: igorsky and LV426
Error 53 has been around since the iPhone 6 came out, not sure why it's taken people this long to notice! I have a repair shop and it occurred on a 6 we bought missing the entire front screen, not sure why it's such a surprise now or why Apple have said its IOS9.

No I don't agree with them disabling peoples devices considering what people may store on there...

If they're going to at least GIVE SOME WARNING that it may happen.
 
And as I am reading the article...the other tab is loading the Apple Deals, where it shows this:
I can't help to laugh like mad due to the coincidence...
pencil53twelvesouth-800x380.jpg
 
You seem to know NOT A LOT about this, because if so, you wouldn't be giving these erroneous replies. You are using a platform DESIGNED BY APPLE - you are using their software UNDER LICENCE - you don't get to tell Apple how to run THEIR SECURITY MODEL, you merely own the PHYSICAL HARDWARE, not the way security is implemented, using it. If don't like VERY tight security, maybe you enjoy risking YOUR information, so, call Apple and ask them to design a PERSONALISED iPhone with special security holes which allow knock-off secure chain part swaps, then get back to us and tell us how it went.
I'm saying this because on previous iPhones Apple did just that, disable only the touchID. Also Apple will force you to purshase a new screen if you just want to replace the button. I've done many repairs on iPhones. This is not an issue of using unapproved parts- using an oem button will result in the same problem unless you go pay Apple over $100 to replace a $5 part.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dk001
To all those people using the TERRIBLE analogy of car parts, you clearly don't understand that a CAR does not store banking information, personal photos, a secure wallet, myriad logins for almost anything you can imagine...

TERRIBLE, laughable analogy - go back to analogy school and make up a better one. :D

No, but a phone doesn't cause you to randomly accelerate into a group of people if you install a new horn either....
 
No, but a phone doesn't cause you to randomly accelerate into a group of people if you install a new horn either....

The fail is VERY strong on this thread. Wow. Your comment is unbelievably flawed in it's inability to match the scenario which is causing all this hoo-haa and drama queening from people who clearly DO NOT understand the platform.

I do not want to have to resort to posting meme images pertaining to "fail", but since the fail is strong, I am having to resist this urge, proportionally!
 
  • Like
Reactions: igorsky
This makes no sense. I've done numerous screen replacements and button replacements for friends/ family. It's stupid easy to do. The issue isn't that the replacement part doesn't work, you can use an OEM screen/button and you will get the same error unless APPLE Re-validates the Touch ID to the phone. In the past (iphone 5s) Apple just disabled the touchID, now they decided to brick the whole phone... The replacement parts work just fine and don't cause any issues, Apple just wants you to come to them. Just like jailbreaking your phone isn't illegal but they sure tried to stop you from doing it.
It makes sense if someone hacked an iPhone by replacing the Touch ID sensor and exploiting a security hole in iOS. If they then reported the hack to Apple, then Apple would do their best to close the hole in newer versions of iOS. They probably wouldn't issue a press release explaining how to hack older iOS versions to get at people's personal data. They would just fix the hole in a later release.

Your past experience replacing your friends and family probably put their iPhones at risk, but if you're lucky, the exploit was not well enough known for anyone to take advantage of your incomplete repair jobs.

I agree that Apple wants you to come to them for repairs. It's not just about money. They want to control the kind of hardware their software is running on, so they can provide a consistent level of quality. It's been their strategy from the start. You'd think the company that ran the 1984 Big Brother ad would follow up by licensing the Macintosh operating system to run on any hardware you wanted. That would be true freedom, right? Anything less is everything Jobs and Wozniak were claiming to be against, right?

I realize that there is no way to convince anyone who feels oppressed by Apple's attempt to control their ecosystem. And certainly no way to silence those who are outside that ecosystem but like to take potshots at it.

All I can say is that this is nothing new, and the end result is a system that is a joy to use for most of the people using it. Complaints about "walled gardens", non replaceable batteries, and soldered RAM were around BEFORE Apple's impressive rise.

I've been the "victim" of an unauthorized repair that bricked my iPhone 5. I dropped it and shattered the screen, so I took it to a place in the mall that replaced the screen for a lot less than it would have cost at the Apple Store a few doors down. It was a little thicker than the OEM screen, but otherwise worked fine. Then later, Apple issued a recall for iPhone 5's that were experiencing battery problems. They would replace the battery for free if your iPhone was in a certain range of serial numbers. I took mine in, but the tech told me he couldn't guarantee the non-Apple screen would survive the repair. I had to decide whether I wanted to fix the battery and risk the screen, or keep the screen but keep the battery life issues. I said to go ahead. (I had already ordered my iPhone 6 and was waiting for it to be delivered.)

Sure enough, the phone came back with a crack across the middle, and it not only wouldn't respond correctly to touch input, but registered touch input randomly when no one was touching it. I couldn't use it to make phone calls. I couldn't answer calls, even with a headset because the random touches would hang up with no warning. I couldn't sync it, or back it up, or even turn it off (I couldn't swipe to complete the shut down). I had to let the battery run down, and then wait a week for the arrival of my iPhone 6.
 
  • Like
Reactions: igorsky
So, according to this logic, if you take your new Lexus to a non-dealership repair shop and they put non-factory aftermarket replacement parts on your car, Lexus is liable when something goes wrong?
Or worse Lexus make your car unusable or locks itself and it won't let you go in because it's unsafe to drive. That's exactly what Apple did to one of the customer.
 
It makes sense if someone hacked an iPhone by replacing the Touch ID sensor and exploiting a security hole in iOS. If they then reported the hack to Apple, then Apple would do their best to close the hole in newer versions of iOS. They probably wouldn't issue a press release explaining how to hack older iOS versions to get at people's personal data. They would just fix the hole in a later release.

Your past experience replacing your friends and family probably put their iPhones at risk, but if you're lucky, the exploit was not well enough known for anyone to take advantage of your incomplete repair jobs.

I agree that Apple wants you to come to them for repairs. It's not just about money. They want to control the kind of hardware their software is running on, so they can provide a consistent level of quality. It's been their strategy from the start. You'd think the company that ran the 1984 Big Brother ad would follow up by licensing the Macintosh operating system to run on any hardware you wanted. That would be true freedom, right? Anything less is everything Jobs and Wozniak were claiming to be against, right?

I realize that there is no way to convince anyone who feels oppressed by Apple's attempt to control their ecosystem. And certainly no way to silence those who are outside that ecosystem but like to take potshots at it.

All I can say is that this is nothing new, and the end result is a system that is a joy to use for most of the people using it. Complaints about "walled gardens", non replaceable batteries, and soldered RAM were around BEFORE Apple's impressive rise.

I've been the "victim" of an unauthorized repair that bricked my iPhone 5. I dropped it and shattered the screen, so I took it to a place in the mall that replaced the screen for a lot less than it would have cost at the Apple Store a few doors down. It was a little thicker than the OEM screen, but otherwise worked fine. Then later, Apple issued a recall for iPhone 5's that were experiencing battery problems. They would replace the battery for free if your iPhone was in a certain range of serial numbers. I took mine in, but the tech told me he couldn't guarantee the non-Apple screen would survive the repair. I had to decide whether I wanted to fix the battery and risk the screen, or keep the screen but keep the battery life issues. I said to go ahead. (I had already ordered my iPhone 6 and was waiting for it to be delivered.)

Sure enough, the phone came back with a crack across the middle, and it not only wouldn't respond correctly to touch input, but registered touch input randomly when no one was touching it. I couldn't use it to make phone calls. I couldn't answer calls, even with a headset because the random touches would hang up with no warning. I couldn't sync it, or back it up, or even turn it off (I couldn't swipe to complete the shut down). I had to let the battery run down, and then wait a week for the arrival of my iPhone 6.
They tried that same argument when they lost the case about jailbreaking your phone. The reality is that even an authentic OEM button will still brick your phone. If Apple makes the revalidating software available to authorized repair shops, this will create a much bigger security issue then a touchID sensor that simply doesn't do anything. How exactly is a replacement button a security issue? You have no idea what your talking about. Their claim is that someone could engineer a device that would use the buttons connection to gain access to the phone, completely different things there buddy.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: dk001
Or worse Lexus make your car unusable or locks itself and it won't let you go in because it's unsafe to drive. That's exactly what Apple did to one of the customer.

You're confusing safety with SECURITY - they are different. Apple is put in charge of looking after YOUR DATA, not how safely you do something which involves their products. Yet again (and again... and again... for the next month I reckon) these APPALLING examples of misunderstanding will cause these hilariously mis-conceived, mismatched analogies to appear. Do Apple lock you out of your phone if you're walking in front of a train which is about to hit you? My reply highlights the folly of your analogy, surely.
 
hope they win megabucks from this :)
Let me get this straight: someone steals phones, got to a third party "repair" shop and replaces components so that the fingerprint ID can be compromised, then can use the phone for ApplePay and whatever else the victims hasn't been able to disable yet. Not to mention also just being able to reset and resell of stolen phone. And you're OK with wth this?
Cybersecurity demands end to end authentication including the devices and connections along the way. Apple is being responsible by validating components every time they are accessed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: igorsky and uid15
the real question here is if someone hacked your data through a 3rd party fix, is apple legally responsible? or is it just a PR catastrophe? because if apple is responsible than yea they should protect themselves however they can.
 
You're confusing safety with SECURITY - they are different. Apple is put in charge of looking after YOUR DATA, not how safely you do something which involves their products. Yet again (and again... and again... for the next month I reckon) these APPALLING examples of misunderstanding will cause these hilariously mis-conceived, mismatched analogies to appear. Do Apple lock you out of your phone if you're walking in front of a train which is about to hit you? My reply highlights the folly of your analogy, surely.

I am not sure your responses on condescending enough. Please up your game.
 
The fail is VERY strong on this thread. Wow. Your comment is unbelievably flawed in it's inability to match the scenario which is causing all this hoo-haa and drama queening from people who clearly DO NOT understand the platform.

I do not want to have to resort to posting meme images pertaining to "fail", but since the fail is strong, I am having to resist this urge, proportionally!
I'm still not convinced the fingerprint scan does not leave the device
 
the real question here is if someone hacked your data through a 3rd party fix, is apple legally responsible? or is it just a PR catastrophe? because if apple is responsible than yea they should protect themselves however they can.
I can't see Apple being responsible for someone altering hardware their sold you and using that alteration to acquire data.
 
Let me get this straight: someone steals phones, got to a third party "repair" shop and replaces components so that the fingerprint ID can be compromised, then can use the phone for ApplePay and whatever else the victims hasn't been able to disable yet. Not to mention also just being able to reset and resell of stolen phone. And you're OK with wth this?
Cybersecurity demands end to end authentication including the devices and connections along the way. Apple is being responsible by validating components every time they are accessed.

People just like to feel all "entitled" and to whine, even IF they don't (and they don't) understand the whole story, usually. Welcome to dorkrumors, where the "thick as syrup" general populus gather, hoping the light of intellect that they (think) is cast upon them by association of being a member of a forum containing SOME intelligent people, will auto-validate their comments and opinions.

Doh.
 
Apple was very smart and "forward looking" to keep everything in the TouchID "hardware chain" as secure as possible. Remember that the TouchID sensor is basically just taking a high resolution picture of your fingerprint. While Apple states that no actual fingerprint images are stored on the device, instead using a mathematical representation of your fingerprint that it is able to match to your print. Realizing that a person only has 10 of these, preventing a malicious TouchID sensor or any hardware that is in between from capturing a print is so much more important than people realize. Especially as people begin to place more and more trust in biometrics due almost entirely because of convenience (however misguided that may be).
 
  • Like
Reactions: itguy06
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.