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.
Law Firms Consider 'Error 53' Lawsuits Against Apple as Some Stores Authorized for Repairs
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's not destoyed just disabled. You would have to have Ford re enable it. Which is what apple is doing. Putting an official Touch ID back in fixes it. Or so I understand
[doublepost=1454992993][/doublepost]
This is similar to how some car head units work. If they detect being tampered with they will permentaly disabled themselves. Deterring anyone from trying to steal them because then they are of no value to anyone.
Since we are using car analogies (not you but the thread is rife With them), I recently bought a spare key for our mini. Long story short it HAD to be ordered through mini because the programming was done in Germany directly linked to the VIN. I spent hours on forums and even asking car locksmiths to no avail. Cost me $400, $180 of which was "programming fees" which was done in less than half an hour.
I'm on your side here. I think this is rather... Questionable, as I did with the key. But when you have no other choice... Fortunately this was made clear to me from the get go (and I confirmed the dealer's statements since sometimes people will misguide you for a buck). I can only imagine how id feel having paid half that, had the key work for a while, and then one day be rendered a paperweight.
[doublepost=1454993207][/doublepost]
Apple reserves the right to refuse any repair work on a device that has already seen third party repairs. And I know this has happened to folks before, having read about their situation. Unsure if this will change in any way moving for ward.
Last edited:
Couple of things:
Several law firms are considering lawsuits against Apple following news that the company disables iPhone 6 models that have third-party repairs that affect Touch ID, reports The Guardian. The "Error 53" controversy started last week when news circulated about customers who have had their iPhones disabled and rendered unusable by a mysterious "error 53" message.
It turns out Apple disables the iPhones of customers who have had unauthorized repairs on their devices. As explained in a thorough post from iFixit, a repair made by a third-party service using non-original components cannot pass a Touch ID validation check because mismatched parts don't sync up properly.
According to an Apple spokesperson, when the iPhone's parts can't be properly validated because of a repair done to a component affecting the Touch ID sensor, the error message is triggered in an intentional effort to keep Touch ID and the secure enclave that stores fingerprint information safe. Damaged phones also have the potential to give the error.A UK barrister told The Guardian disabling iPhones "could potentially be viewed as an offense" under the Criminal Damage Act 1971, which covers the destruction of property, and a Seattle-based law firm, PVCA said it wants to bring a class action lawsuit against Apple, calling on affected customers to get in contact. PVCA is planning to represent customers for free and has outlined the issue on its website, suggesting Apple is violating consumer laws by forcing customers to use Apple-sanctioned repair services.Apple may be planning to proactively head off lawsuits and assuage customer outrage. MacRumors has heard from a retail source that certain Apple Stores have received the go ahead from Apple to replace third-party screens and other third-party components to resolve the error 53 issue. The standard out-of-warranty fee is charged for the repairs and the replacement of non-genuine parts with Apple parts is limited to those affected by the error.
It is not yet clear if all Apple Stores have been authorized to repair error 53 iPhones as Apple's only official statement is that it's a security measure required to prevent fraudulent Touch ID sensors from being installed.
Article Link: Law Firms Consider 'Error 53' Lawsuits Against Apple as Some Stores Authorized for Repairs
1. I consider my iPhone to be the Mercedes Benz of Smart Phones and treat it as such. I'm not taking it to Joe FixIt
2. Get AppleCare to get 2 incidents of accidental damage and extend your warranty
3. If the home button stops working or is damaged, then use the accessibility feature in Settings to get the home button features until you can get the device repaired
4. Refer to #'s 1 and 2. Stop being cheap!
Let's see, why do a hardware integrity check in combination with an operating system update? Ah yes, the software runs on the hardware and in order to verify a flawless installation you got to check both. I knew I could come up with a plausible reason.
This is a security risk to everyone's data, otherwise there's no point to the secure enclave if you can just stick a cheap part on there and access the phone. So Apple is within their rights to say either use our parts or we can't guarantee the safety of your phone.
Guys, this is a good thing. Time to cash in on the class-action lawsuit. At the very least, you'll get a new phone(assuming more people don't register than total phones sold). I'm on board for 4 new phones. I got a 5th that I'm restoring right now in iTunes.
Oh no, it happened again.
I just realized the lawsuit could take 2 years with new phones paid out over 2 years, so I guess I'll take the cash rather than an iPhone 6 in 4 years.
Oh no, it happened again.
I just realized the lawsuit could take 2 years with new phones paid out over 2 years, so I guess I'll take the cash rather than an iPhone 6 in 4 years.
Say what you like.
But unlike the past, there's now a very distinct "Anti-Apple" undercurrent movement that's growing by the day...
This is pathetic. I'm completely with Apple on this one. If you go and get a non-authorised repair & use 3rd party parts then thats the risk you take. When it comes to security I'm glad Apple has things like this in place to prevent malicious stealing of my Touch ID information.
Last edited:
This is the trade off you make..
If Apple could have re-valided after a third party repair on power on, they would have done it already.... Why would they just not do this, just to get customer in Apple store to charge you?
Unless its something physically that device doesn't have, but only Apple does.
That's not to say Apple couldn't implement it in the device, of course they could, unless there is some technical reason why they can't re-validate from the device if it needs validation again.
If Apple could have re-valided after a third party repair on power on, they would have done it already.... Why would they just not do this, just to get customer in Apple store to charge you?
Unless its something physically that device doesn't have, but only Apple does.
That's not to say Apple couldn't implement it in the device, of course they could, unless there is some technical reason why they can't re-validate from the device if it needs validation again.
Why would Apple validate someone else's repairs. I changed to Apple because it is secure so Apple can make even harder for these types of repairers.
There's always been one. Sadly, some people seem to really really hate great technology companies.
Jeez I'm not sure why people feel the need to blindly and so strongly agree to every single thing apple does.
Apple didn't even warn this would happen, it never used to happen, then BANG apple decides it's OK to brick people's phones and you people blindly agree with them?
AT THE VERY LEAST they would make this an opt in situation.
Last edited by a moderator:
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...
I don't think you have read the thread title.
It doesn't say that some of the repairs were carried out by authorised Apple repair shops, it says that MR is led to believe that some Apple stores are now repairing Error 53 iPhones even though they have 3rd party screens on them.
[doublepost=1455004715][/doublepost]MR said:
I don't think the car analogy works.
This isn't simply about Lexus getting the hump and disabling your car because Toyota fixed something innit.
There's a whole security piece here and I think Apple are right to disable the phone, when a non standard part that affects Touch ID is detected.
I'll bet that if the same lawyer's iPhone had its home button replaced by a 3rd party repairer that then exposed his phone so that anyone could use his Touch ID to empty his accounts and have an online spend up, he'd be suing Apple for having a poor security design on the phone.
No, TOUCH ID protects all info in that phone. Disabling it via software makes it a big liability for Apple.
Putting a message would be better: Your iPhone uses an unauthorized repair part which jeopardizes your devices' security. Please go to settings and disable touch ID or have the device repaired at an authorized dealer.
But then you'd hear Apple is like big brother watching you etc. etc..
Can't win
Touchid is another method of putting your PIN in. Whenever the phone fails to read your finger id, you have to put in the pin. Pre iphone 5S our data was protected fine by a pin, post iphone 5S our data is still protected fine by a pin, some choose to use the secondary method of using the touchid. Touchid is not the primary method, cause upon failure it reverts to primary which is your pin, as it does upon restart. Its "optional" .
An iphone with a repaired homebutton is secure, disabling the touchid just removes a secondary access function. Its on apple to provide evidence that a 3rd party home button can circumnavigate their security, having researched it, it is not possible, this is scaremongering, this was covered to death when touchid launched. Notice that Apple does not state it as a fact.....
How is disabling Touchid and forcing the user to use PIN, the core method, instead of the optional finger scanner a big liability. The User knows they had their home button repaired with and unauthorised part, there for they can expect it not to function correctly.
You cannot get any more BIG BROTHER, than having your phone bricked for a repair on a part that's function is optional.
Yeah, of course they do.
We all hate Apple because they are big and successful. Not because of their actions or inactions, simply because they exist.
Jeez, get a grip.
There's an Anti-whatever-is-on-top in all things. People just like to bring down the top dog.
If we believe the narrative that someone could access your private data by replacing a sensor, the only logical conclusion is that Apple designed a vulnerable system.
Which leaves us with 2 possibilities:
1) Apple is bricking those phones on purpose, and thus admitting the vulnerability. Otherwise iOS could simply disable Touch ID or even lock the device, but no, it has to auto destruct the device to prevent this vulnerability.
2) Apple is not bricking those phones on purpose. Clearly this would be even worse and very, very bad for Apple's public image.
To find out if it's either 1 or 2 we need a public investigation. It doesn't matter which side you are on.
Also for a company like Apple it really makes no sense that it would permanently damage your property without your consent or at least inform you very clearly in advance. Not only it's ilegal on any country on earth, but it would go against all Apple's practices. Why would iOS ask for your permission to let an app use the microphone but not let you know in advance that it might kill your device?
Which leaves us with 2 possibilities:
1) Apple is bricking those phones on purpose, and thus admitting the vulnerability. Otherwise iOS could simply disable Touch ID or even lock the device, but no, it has to auto destruct the device to prevent this vulnerability.
2) Apple is not bricking those phones on purpose. Clearly this would be even worse and very, very bad for Apple's public image.
To find out if it's either 1 or 2 we need a public investigation. It doesn't matter which side you are on.
Also for a company like Apple it really makes no sense that it would permanently damage your property without your consent or at least inform you very clearly in advance. Not only it's ilegal on any country on earth, but it would go against all Apple's practices. Why would iOS ask for your permission to let an app use the microphone but not let you know in advance that it might kill your device?