Law Firms Consider 'Error 53' Lawsuits Against Apple as Some Stores Authorized for Repairs

[macfacts]

I am with Apple on this one. They are protecting your fingerprint data, and more importantly most likely is your bank information. So if error-53 never showed up and and somehow people got your banking data and stole money from you, you would want to sue Apple for that as well right? This is for your security, so stop complaining!

What security? If the thief/hacker doesn't update the iPhone, it won't brick. Can someone from Apple prove this is not some backdoor for the NSA?

 

[C DM]

Except the hardware only fails to work when the software is restored or updated. Until such a time that occurs, the phone continues to work, with the third party component installed, albeit with the Touch ID functionality disabled. Some devices may never be updated to newer software, and they will continue to work without issue in this state with the only option available to the user being a passcode. It bricks however when the software is updated.

That would suggest that disabling the Touch ID sensor alone and thereby making the "secure enclave" useless is more than adequate for ensuring the phone remains secure. If it was considered a major security concern by Apple, the device would stop booting as soon as the sensor is replaced and the touch sensor and logic board keys are mismatched.

There are a lot of commenters on here that know nothing about the implications of using third party components, but also a lot of commenters that know nothing about the internal functions of the iPhone that are now claiming to be security experts based on a statement issued by Apple Public Relations, who will always issue statements that paint Apple in a favourable light because that's their sole purpose.

When it comes down to it, disabling the Touch ID and nullifying data stored within the secure space would be adequate, and Apple is capable of doing this because until now it's what they have always done. I see devices almost on a weekly basis with replaced displays and the Touch ID button replaced with a standard home button (that is NO touch functionality, that cable isn't even present or connected) that work without issue. The only difference is that the device has no Touch ID capabilities or even the option to enable it. Instead they have chosen to disable the entire device, including all of the functionality that requires no use of Touch ID, such as making calls, sending messages or using applications, when there was absolutely no need to.

That's what the issue is, and in that regard I don't believe affected owners are out of line to complain.

Perhaps the low level hardware checks can only reasonably be done when the device goes through an upgrade or restore process and not with a normal boot up?

 

[uid15]

Cry me a river, then build a bridge and get over it.

 

[LovingTeddy]

No, I think that is what YOU want to express.

What I want to express is what I wrote.

That is pretty much the fact right? The third party hardware worked fine before the update and somehow Apple managed make the whole phone unusable. So what to conclude, Apple wants to protect its interest and its way of making money, so Apple pushed software updates that kills phone with non-Apple parts. It is very clearly that Apple is intentionally doing so.
[doublepost=1454988263][/doublepost]

If you want an insecure phone, buy an Android.

At least my Android phone won't get bricked via software update becuase i changed my screen. That is the difference. I rather have insecured phone than have a company bullying me in their ways.
[doublepost=1454988428][/doublepost]

Allow me to add you to the list I am compiling, entitled: "People who discuss security platforms, but don't understand how they work"

Allow me add you to the list: pretending know everything and defend Apple's crappy behavior no matter what.

But, I don't use iPhone, I don't have to worry about error 35 get my way

 

[dk001]

Here's how it works, dumbed down for ANYONE to comprehend:

Imagine you have a "Chip and PIN" credit card, and the chip becomes damaged, and you decide to buy a silicon wafer from a possibly nefarious, unknown eBay shop (they're called "gold cards" and DO exist), prise the broken chip out of your credit card, and replace it with a wafer you bought from some unknown quantity Chinese seller... and then attempt to draw money from your ATM. You then wonder "Why won't they let me have MY money?"

The silicon is the trusted part that tells the bank "Hey, he's Joe Schmoe, he is the owner, give him his money, his credentials check out okay"

Well duh... just a LITTLE thought, perhaps?

Apples, Steak. If you could fit in where he can still use the card for a few months then "security" kicks in, okay.
This check / brick function does not read like a security check. It reads like a system check on update. That isn't security except as an secondary function.

 

[uid15]

That is pretty much the fact right? The third party hardware worked fine before the update and somehow Apple managed make the whole phone unusable. So what to conclude, Apple wants to protect its interest and its way of making money, so Apple pushed software updates that kills phone with non-Apple parts. It is very clearly that Apple is intentionally doing so.
[doublepost=1454988263][/doublepost]


At least my Android phone won't get bricked via software update becuase i changed my screen. That is the difference. I rather have insecured phone than have a company bullying me in their ways.
[doublepost=1454988428][/doublepost]

Allow me add you to the list: pretending know everything and defend Apple's crappy behavior no matter what.

But, I don't use iPhone, I don't have to worry about error 35 get my way

^ Gosh, can't even get a simple number right. 53

I don't use an iPhone either, but that doesn't cause me to be an Apple-"hating" defensive Android asshat.

Not knowing NOTHING, and speaking about what I DO know (which is NOT "everything" by any means), is not me implying "I know EVERYTHING".

Nice try, but no.

PS: People are HUMAN BEINGS, you cannot segregate people into black & white "groups" based on which tech brand they choose and use, LOL - who thinks that way? Idiotic. Simpleton thinking that is, and convenient when that's YOUR ONLY way to grasp a weak reason to attack people online.

 

[macfacts]

Locking you out of your phone IN CASE "YOU" ARE NOT YOU, is not "bricking"; "bricking" is a device being TOTALLY DEAD, not responding to ANYTHING AT ALL. I am a firmware and electronics engineer, I revive phones and tablets I am told were "bricked", daily - people are CLUELESS about this coined term and what it really means.

PS: It's Apple's lock, and if they choose to tighten the chain and add more bolts, tough - its TO PROTECT YOU. Instead of moaning, how about go and read the EULA which you agreed to.

Pro tip: If the iphone requires a firmware and electronics engineer to fix it, it means it is bricked.

 

[uid15]

Apples, Steak. If you could fit in where he can still use the card for a few months then "security" kicks in, okay.
This check / brick function does not read like a security check. It reads like a system check on update. That isn't security except as an secondary function.

Hey Phil, how's the car project?

 

[dk001]

So Apple tightened their security policies with an update (their perogative, their platform), and you think that's a BAD thing because it protects you MORE? It's called keeping their integrity and protecting their customers.

Wow... mere words can't express... this thread is a bucket of fail and intentional misunderstandings that someone pushed over, and it spilled everywhere, and the puddle continues to spread, causing increasing numbers of people to "slip over" on the spill of misinformation.

Wow... have a nice day whingers.

I'm still waiting on how this protects me more... It doesn't. TouchID is a convenience that precludes you from having to enter your passcode/passphrase every single time.

 

[uid15]

Pro tip: If the iphone requires a firmware and electronics engineer to fix it, it means it is bricked.

According to Wikipedia you're right, but according to rational logic, the term "brick" implies a useless lump that could only be used as a brick, and nothing else. Anyhoo, I am being pedantic, it's no big deal. Thanks for pointing that out

 

[dk001]

Locking you out of your phone IN CASE "YOU" ARE NOT YOU, is not "bricking"; "bricking" is a device being TOTALLY DEAD, not responding to ANYTHING AT ALL. I am a firmware and electronics engineer, I revive phones and tablets I am told were "bricked", daily - people are CLUELESS about this coined term and what it really means.

PS: It's Apple's lock, and if they choose to tighten the chain and add more bolts, tough - its TO PROTECT YOU. Instead of moaning, how about go and read the EULA which you agreed to.

According to Apple, they are "bricking" your device and for only select units, select locations will grant you an allowance on a trade in. If you, in your infinite wisdom find a way to "unbrick" an error 53 device please let us know.

 

[uid15]

I'm still waiting on how this protects me more... It doesn't. TouchID is a convenience that precludes you from having to enter your passcode/passphrase every single time.

I'm still waiting for you to go and read the Apple white paper on TouchID security, fully understand it, and maybe also take a course in electronics and silicon design (note: being a parts replacement droid who uses muscle memory and guides, unscrews devices, replaced broken parts and screws them up again IS NOT understanding how they work, in case you're wondering)

 

[LovingTeddy]

^ Gosh, can't even get a simple number right. 53

I don't use an iPhone either, but that doesn't cause me to be an Apple-"hating" defensive Android asshat.

Not knowing NOTHING, and speaking about what I DO know (which is NOT "everything" by any means), is not me implying "I know EVERYTHING".

Nice try, but no.

PS: People are HUMAN BEINGS, you cannot segregate people into black & white "groups" based on which tech brand they choose and use, LOL - who thinks that way? Idiotic. Simpleton thinking that is, and convenient when that's YOUR ONLY way to grasp a weak reason to attack people online.

Apple hating? LOL... The whole thing Apple doing is creppy...If you think againest Apple on doing creppy thing is Ape hating, that is fine. I am not going to buy products from a company that render my phone useless when I do repairs somewhere else.

Seriously. If Apple simply disable TouchID or wipe out data, I would not be upset. I understand that Apple wants to protect users data, but I am not OK with rendering my phone uesless and I have to get replacement phone simply because I did repair somewhere else.

 

[SusanK]

I'm amused that Apple defenders look to auto makers/dealers/dealer service for an example of impeccable business ethics. Has Apple fallen that far?

 

[stopthenonsense]

It has nothing to do with bogus fingerprint sensors. Rather it has to do with matching fingerprint sensor and logic board. If you buy two identical iphones, and swap their screens (with fingerprint sensors attached), the phones will give this error and become unusuable. Even though both phones have 100% genuine and untampered with fingerprint sensors.

This detail is important - it has nothing to do with authenticity or security of the fingerprint sensor. In theory, the original fingerprint sensor could be tampered with and it would not throw this error. The error only comes up there the phone detects that a fingerprint sensor different from the original one is attached to the logic board.

Those are original parts and Apple CAN sync the "new" sensor to the main board. It's the third party sensors that are the issue. Apple is not going to sync a part that is not original and risk the secure enclave. There's a reason Apple is not Samsung, and this is one of them.

 

[uid15]

According to Apple, they are "bricking" your device and for only select units, select locations will grant you an allowance on a trade in. If you, in your infinite wisdom find a way to "unbrick" an error 53 device please let us know.

They're likely using this term because that's the term the general population associate with the symptoms. Meh, it's academic, a distraction, let's not go down rabbit holes of pedantic distraction.

 

[dk001]

Hey, years ago I had to go without my MacBook Pro for a couple weeks while they made a warranty repair. I didn't die. Although someone at the local DHL depot stole my computer after it came back from repair. So after and investigation, DHLs insurance company bought me a brand new one.

It depends on your use. I know far too many where there device is there only communication item. Using a local long term repair shop is normal. Then look at other countries - there are no Apple repair facilities in country. It goes both ways but all to frequently, "ship it an Apple facility" is not a realistic option.

 

[SublimeHellcat]

Let me ask you this: Should I have my barber fix my car's transmission?




That would be NO! And if I did, I wouldn't expect Honda to fix it when it broke or didn't work...why...because my barber isn't qualified nor is he an authorized mechanic for Honda. The same thing applies here. People take their iPhones to un-authorized retailers to get it fixed and the complain when Apple disables the device?

So, the lesson of the day...take your **** to the right people if you want it to work.

It would make more sense if you actually compared (no pun intended) apples to apples. So you always bring your car to the dealer for every single repair? If you were on a trip with a broken serpentine belt which rendered your car useless and the next dealer was 100 miles away your thinking dictates being towed 100 miles to the next shop. The other option is have a qualified local repair shop replace the belt with better than OEM part. My guess is most folks would have this extremely simple repair, (just like a screen repair which is a very simple repair) done at the local repair shop. Not sure why you would bring your car to a barber shop. Most people get their hair cut at this establishment, not get their car fixed there.

 

[stopthenonsense]

Sorry about that, I should have clarified that I was speaking about the use of non-authorized centers.

There is not guarantee that the authorized store is using official parts. IF they were, they would have done all the steps required to replace the touch ID. The repair center is who should be sued, because even if they used an official part, they didn't do all the steps required.

 

[MikeSmoke]

I'm a professional musician. I'm changing my band name to ERROR 53.... It's a winner!

 

[GoodWheaties]

This is so silly. This has nothing to do with fake, phony, or unauthorized sensors and EVERYTHING to do with the pairing between a specific processor and a specific TouchID sensor. It's no problem replacing the screen as long as you or whomever is doing the repair moves the sensor to the new screen. I've done it more than once, no problems. Any repair place that is worth anything should know that it won't work to put any other sensor in there, but should that be necessary, I believe Apple can pair a new sensor with your processor again. So what's the problem again? Never mind, just become outraged.

 

[gavroche]

This was meant as a starting point not as the all-source of truth.
Finding one that Apple fixed and that fixed caused the repair will likely be hard to find. All most can do is infer the cause.
Most likely it would be an authorized dealer who use OEM parts and just replaced a button instead of the screen button pair.

Thanks for digging into this one though.

I merely pointed out to someone that was ripping someone else for not "reading the article" that the article did not in fact support what the headline asserting. Nothing more or less intended.
Macrumors did a large disservice to its readers today by inciting a lot of nonsense posts due entirely to a very very poorly worded headline.

 

[firewood]

And the error came after 10 month of usage and via a software update. Such trusted chain. I think that chain was malfunctioned for few months.

The iOS update said it included security fixes. This may have been one. If you don't want security and other bug fixes, don't install updates.

 

[crisss1205]

Geez...It says right in the headline that some of the stores were authorized. You didn't even have to read through the entire article to see that...

And again, read the headline! It clearly says "...Some Stores Authorized For Repairs"

The headline makes no sense and feels like an incomplete sentence.

The article says that some Apple Stores are authorizing repairs.

As in, Apple stores are replacing phones for an OOW fee for users who are suffering the error. Normally, if a device has 3rd party parts, Apple will not even look at the device.

 

[Gudi]

I'm amused that Apple defenders look to auto makers/dealers/dealer service for an example of impeccable business ethics. Has Apple fallen that far?

Apple defenders, what happened to fanboys?

I'm not surprised so many people who fail to understand Error 53 also fail to understand why car repairs are an appropriate analogy. Stakes are high with cars, because a faulty repair could kill you, everyone in your car and on the street. It's kind of important to have clear responsibilities with car safety.

But for a change let's ask ourselves, who gets the job to repair the thermal blanket of the space shuttle? Anyone or a company specially authorized for this work by NASA? And if the pilot was to choose another unauthorized repair shop, who would be responsible when that thing comes down in a fireball?

That's the point with analogies, I can come up with as many as you need. Next up, who's going to repair a nuclear power plant in your neighborhood. Homer Simpson or Blinky the three-eyed fish?

Unauthorized Repair​