Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
all they have to do is just disable the TouchID so that they can't use apple pay.they don't have to brick the entire phone.
I'm presuming you mean disable Touch ID altogether?

Disabling it just for Apple Pay wouldn't work for me, as both my bank's app and my Amex card's app both use Touch ID to log on, so I wouldn't want Apple Pay restricted but my bank accounts and my Amex card apps open for emptying thanks.
 
Hey Ford!! I took the ignition out of my Explorer and replaced it with one from Bob's Cheap Ignitions down the street, and now my car won't start! You bastards did this on purpose! I'm lawyering up!

How is this even a comparable situation?

What would be more comparable is; your car breaks, you take it to a mechanic which isn't your car dealer, which, guess what? Every damn person who owns a car and isn't made of money does. A part is replaced and the issue you had is fixed. A month later you then go for a routine yearly service at the dealer and the manufacturer takes your keys off you because they found a third party replacement part. Leaving you with a giant expensive ornament.

This isn't about security, and this is a much greater issue than you and the indescribable, ever devoting, can do no wrong in your eyes relationship you have with a major corporation. They don't love you and wouldn't be ever so defending on you in a lawsuit. Take off the blinkers and look at this logically, I like Apple products as much as the next person, I've owned numerous iPods, MacBooks, iMacs, Apple TVs, iPads, every iPhone and a watch, but I still can see when they're doing wrong.

This is not a security issue, it's money grabbing.

When my oven breaks, and needs the element that it relies on to create heat replacing, do I have to go to the manufacturer to come and repair it and replace the part? Or can I phone up my local electrician to do it, who then offers me third or first party parts of my choosing? When he fits the third party alternative, does the manufacturer just stop the oven turning on because they jumped to a conclusion that there's a risk that this third party part is cheaper or "dodgy" and could perhaps burn my house down? Which lets face it is a much more severe repercussion than someone being able to bypass a fingerprint scanner on my phone. No they don't and have no right to.

Apple have no right to do what they're doing, a prompt should come up warning you perhaps that it has detected that you've had a non original Apple Touch ID component added to your device and you must proceed to use your phone at your own risk, alternatively go to Apple and pay for a replacement component.

They could in a worst case scenario disable all Touch ID services, or wipe all existing Touch ID data off your phone and force you to set it all up again, therefore compromising nothing. That's their data/privacy responsibilities catered for, the phone doesn't need to become a brick.

But even that is a step too far, where do these people who got these dodgy third party Touch ID sensors with the ability to steal your information (which we have no evidence actually exist) also get your passcode and password from? They would need to enter your passcode to unlock the phone once they power it on and they would need to enter your password the first time you use Touch ID, your data is safe anyway.

Apple should get rid of this awful "error 53" message immediately, and they should refund anyone who they've charged for a new phone. They don't need to replace third party components free of charge that should just be up to the user if they want to replace it, which they shouldn't have to.

If my MacBook battery dies, or my screen cracks and I replace it myself or get a third party repair centre to do so, should that stop working too? There's plenty of similar information on there that's only a single password (or not even that away) too.

Stop trying to defend the indefensible and think about the bigger picture of consumer rights and freedom to shop around. If we create this massive monopoly that you want you'll soon regret the lack of competition and choice available to you, with competition comes lower pricing and a better market for the consumer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dk001 and dnsp
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.

Except there is no proof its possible! I cannot believe how much people are buying into a statement. All these people must be lapping up the BS the governments tells them to sign away thier liberties due to " potential threats"

Look at the statement.

"Without this unique pairing, a malicious touch ID sensor could be substituted, thereby gaining access to the secure enclave. When iOS detects that the pairing fails, touch ID, including Apple Pay, is disabled so the device remains secure."

Its hypothetical, and its also BS, cause it reads that touchid and apple pay are disabled. When infact the phone is disabled.

So if your touchid button in your phone, suffers a malfunction, due to wear or water damage etc, never been repaired and the os determines the paring is broken, and your iphone bricks, your cool with that? Apple has the right to leave your stranded somewhere, with a dead phone? instead of falling back to PIN?

Those iphone 5S units must be vastly superior when it comes to security, cause error 53 does not effect them ;)

I have the best security when it comes to Apple pay, a completely incompetent bank in Barclays......by not working, I cannot loose anything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dk001 and dnsp
Chorus: "...It's a security-related device...yadda yadda...Apple is just trying to protect you...yadda yadda..."

Reality: It's all just BS. Apple is employing anti-competetive practices at our expense... and hilariously, most people here are actually defending Apple.

All these third-party spare part vendors are there in the first place, because Apple keeps rediculously overcharging for repair and spare parts. They are. And the reason they do this is, so you buy AppleCare. Which is rediculously overpriced as well, but often cheaper than buying a new device, in exchange for a device that should not have failed this early in the first place.

Naturally, a competitor appears and offers a cheaper repair for folks who are either out of luck, warranty or AppleCare.

The TouchID(tm)-home button is essentially just a stupid sensor. Stupid as in "very little intelligence on it's own". Which, from a security-standpoint, is a good thing.
Being just a stupid sensor, it can be asked to fetch data for you on request, that you take and compare to pre-existing data you have stored somewhere else, way apart from that stupid sensor.

IF the iPhone was designed with any common sense for security in mind, it would be nearly impossible even with a malicious TouchID(tm)-button to unlock the device. Your evil TouchID(tm)-button could deliver faulty data...or a lot of garbled random data. That's why it's always a good idea to parse your input data before you're attempting to do anything with it.

So I really don't see, from a technical perspective, how you could build a faulty fingerprint TouchID(tm)-sensor button that unlocks an iPhone(tm)...Most people here say, that this is very likely and very much possible. So I'm reaching out to any these uber-hackers here that claim, iPhones can be unlocked with a third-party sensor - PLEASE tell me how... I really wonder...just out of curiousity.

Easily my biggest curiousity: What are "error 52" and "error 54"?

TL;DR:
Apple is perma-bricking your perfectly-working iPhones. To protect you.
A perceived majority of people here think, there's nothing wrong with it. and consider "error 53" a perfect reason.
Microsoft would be severely punished for such anti-competetive behavior. For good reason. And they have been in the past.
 
With few exceptions, it is illegal in the US and apparently much of the EU, to require that a consumer use only the manufacturer's parts or service centers.
In the UK in order for a car under warranty to maintain the warranty the car can be serviced at any repair centre or garage but that place must use genuine parts. I recently had a service on a year old Vauxhall Astra my wife owns done by my uncle at his garage ahead of a "warranty inspection" at the Vauxhall dealer. After the work has been done i had to take the car along with the invoice of the genuine parts he bought from them before they approved the warranty for another year. The law changed a few years ago meaning that cars dont have to be serviced etc at main dealers to keep the warranty valid just that genuine parts are used. If i'd taken the car back for the check having used random parts from some cheap chinese ebay store i suspect they would have told me where to stick my warranty!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Matthew.H
I'm presuming you mean disable Touch ID altogether?

Disabling it just for Apple Pay wouldn't work for me, as both my bank's app and my Amex card's app both use Touch ID to log on, so I wouldn't want Apple Pay restricted but my bank accounts and my Amex card apps open for emptying thanks.

You bank apps uses touchid As a secondary access function. Go into your phone settings, turn off Touchid, and go back into your banking app, your can still use and access your app. There is NOT one app that only accepts Touchid. Touch id is optional.

If apple disabled touchid, as you can, in the settings, all your apps would still work fine.

You would be inconvenienced, its would be like owning an iphone 5 instead of 5S.
 
In the UK in order for a car under warranty to maintain the warranty the car can be serviced at any repair centre or garage but that place must use genuine parts. I recently had a service on a year old Vauxhall Astra my wife owns done by my uncle at his garage ahead of a "warranty inspection" at the Vauxhall dealer. After the work has been done i had to take the car along with the invoice of the genuine parts he bought from them before they approved the warranty for another year. The law changed a few years ago meaning that cars dont have to be serviced etc at main dealers to keep the warranty valid just that genuine parts are used. If i'd taken the car back for the check having used random parts from some cheap chinese ebay store i suspect they would have told me where to stick my warranty!!

Massive difference in voiding a warranty and disabling your car. If they took your key off you, you would be in a similar situation, but they haven't.

The reason for the legislation you are quoting is you have a standard minimum 3 year warranty for the car, why would Vauxhall offer a warranty on any third party items they didn't make and can't guarantee the shelf life of? That's an entirely different issue and not translatable to this error 53 issue at all.

Also, unless you crash the car, why would you not take it to be repaired free of charge at the dealer anyway? That seems bizarre, opting to pay.
 
In the UK in order for a car under warranty to maintain the warranty the car can be serviced at any repair centre or garage but that place must use genuine parts. I recently had a service on a year old Vauxhall Astra my wife owns done by my uncle at his garage ahead of a "warranty inspection" at the Vauxhall dealer. After the work has been done i had to take the car along with the invoice of the genuine parts he bought from them before they approved the warranty for another year. The law changed a few years ago meaning that cars dont have to be serviced etc at main dealers to keep the warranty valid just that genuine parts are used. If i'd taken the car back for the check having used random parts from some cheap chinese ebay store i suspect they would have told me where to stick my warranty!!

There is a difference in Vauxhall rejecting your extension of your warranty, and your Vauxhall car not starting one morning cause the car computer detected a Chinese part in the car. I'm sure in that scenario, where they told you you have to arrange for your car to be brought into a Vaxhaull dealership at your expense to replace that part, you would have a few choice words to say to them :)

Its not illegal to use non Vauxhaull parts In the car industry, many 3rd party parts are actually authorised and have to be by law. Here Apple is saying you must use "one part" the part it supplies, and to help you with the decision, its going to break the device you bought and own, until you do.
 
There is a difference in Vauxhall rejecting your extension of your warranty, and your Vauxhall car not starting one morning cause the car computer detected a Chinese part in the car. I'm sure in that scenario, where they told you you have to arrange for your car to be brought into a Vaxhaull dealership at your expense to replace that part, you would have a few choice words to say to them :)

Its not illegal to use non Vauxhaull parts In the car industry, many 3rd party parts are actually authorised and have to be by law. Here Apple is saying you must use "one part" the part it supplies, and to help you with the decision, its going to break the device you bought and own, until you do.
On the other hand if it's a more sensitive part that might control a lot of the electronics in the car that has some particular programming to go with it perhaps it might be the case that only the manfacturer version of that past with manufacturer programming would be valid and other replacements of it would render the electronics in the car (which basically means the car itself) inoperable.
 
I don't get it.

Why apple is bricking the whole phone and not just disabling every touch-id feature in the phone if 3rd party parts are being used.

They say

"When iOS detects that the pairing fails, touch ID, including Apple Pay, is disabled so the device remains secure.”

What they should say

When iOS detects that the pairing fails, touch ID, including Apple Pay, is disabled and the whole phone is bricked so you basically have to buy a new phone or pay very expensive repair.
 
Last edited:
I don't get it.

Why apple is bricking the whole phone and not just disabling every touch-id feature in the phone if 3rd party parts are being used.

They say

"When iOS detects that the pairing fails, touch ID, including Apple Pay, is disabled so the device remains secure.”

What they should say

When iOS detects that the pairing fails, touch ID, including Apple Pay, is disabled and the whole phone bricked so you basically have to buy a new phone or pay very expensive repair.

For all we know, there might be good technical reasons for it. I can't see the money generated by repairs being enough of an incentive for Apple to pull a stunt like this.
 
For all we know, there might be good technical reasons for it.

This is why Apple should be making comment, explaining their reasoning and making their customer base aware of the issue and telling them what they can do, rather than just staying silent and leaving people to guess.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dk001 and Ladybug
There is a difference in Vauxhall rejecting your extension of your warranty, and your Vauxhall car not starting one morning cause the car computer detected a Chinese part in the car. I'm sure in that scenario, where they told you you have to arrange for your car to be brought into a Vaxhaull dealership at your expense to replace that part, you would have a few choice words to say to them :)
.

Thats not a relevent comparison, in the case of iPhones, people have had the parts replaced and happily used them for months, and apple have updated them to not work, after the repairs have taken place.

If they wanted to implement this, it needed to be done at the time they were released and they needed to tell people about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dk001 and Ladybug
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?
No it would be like Lexus deliberately disabling your car from working because you had fitted a non Lexus part to it.
 
Spot on. People seem to forget that what Apple has done here is nothing to do with warranty. You can refuse further warranty because of a non standard repair but this is different.

They have deliberately gone and rendered useless the property of someone else. That is, in some countries termed "willful destruction or damage to property" and is a criminal offence. You can't damage or render useless a handset that you don't own, is the property of someone else, just because you think you have a right to.

What they should have done is locked the device and say "due to security issues we need you to verify you are the owner....". connect to itunes/whatever, stick in your password/security and if ok, they re-enable the device.

What was Apple thinking?

No it would be like Lexus deliberately disabling your car from working because you had fitted a non Lexus part to it.
 
But if Apple didn't do this and somehow touch ID information was leaked, people would go crazy cause Apple should have something in place for this. You buy an expensive iPhone, don't get it repaired at some cheap corner store shop and expect your data to still be secure and your phone to work perfectly
[doublepost=1455012890][/doublepost]
Spot on. People seem to forget that what Apple has done here is nothing to do with warranty. You can refuse further warranty because of a non standard repair but this is different.

They have deliberately gone and rendered useless the property of someone else. That is, in some countries termed "willful destruction or damage to property" and is a criminal offence. You can't damage or render useless a handset that you don't own, is the property of someone else, just because you think you have a right to.

What they should have done is locked the device and say "due to security issues we need you to verify you are the owner....". connect to itunes/whatever, stick in your password/security and if ok, they re-enable the device.

What was Apple thinking?
Because if because of a bogus repair fingerprint data and bank account data is lost, Apple will be so deep in lawsuits it's crazy. They do not want that, simple, get your phone repaired cheaply and unauthorized it voids the warranty and may brick the phone. Just pay the little extra to get it fixed properly. :)
 
The EU will go nuts with Apple for this. Once an item has been purchased then it is the property of the customer. You can do what you wish with it and Apple can not render the device inactive. This is like a car's computer noticing some unofficial parts and then refusing to start. There is also the issue that Apple parts are not widely available to everyone like car parts are and only to authorised repairers. This is just another reason why the EU needs to go after Apple as it has done with Microsoft and Google. Apple is far to powerful and does not stand up for the rights of the customer. In the same way it blatantly hides and ignores UK law to sell you extended warranty that is just not needed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dave.UK and dnsp
But if Apple didn't do this and somehow touch ID information was leaked, people would go crazy cause Apple should have something in place for this. You buy an expensive iPhone, don't get it repaired at some cheap corner store shop and expect your data to still be secure and your phone to work perfectly
[doublepost=1455012890][/doublepost]
Because if because of a bogus repair fingerprint data and bank account data is lost, Apple will be so deep in lawsuits it's crazy. They do not want that, simple, get your phone repaired cheaply and unauthorized it voids the warranty and may brick the phone. Just pay the little extra to get it fixed properly. :)

Apple have had touch ID since the 5S came out though!

Why now and why like this? It's clumsy and potentially unlawful.

Remember that a lot of third party phone repairers do a superb job for a reasonable charge and hire experienced technicians on a good salary. They're not all back alley market stalls.
 
People need to understand that Apple Pay is not some stand-alone Apple thing which they have complete liberty to change at will. Apple pay is Apple's implementation of the global EMV (Eurocard, Mastercard, Visa) standard, and as such needs to be (and of course has been) approved by the EMV organization. Only with this approval will all of those organizations around the world allow acceptance of Apple pay at retailer terminals and provide the consumer guarantees against fraud. To get the approval, Apple need to demonstrate that their biometric identifier model meets or exceeds EMV standards. If any old chop shop can mess with the hardware and put at risk the security model, Apple pay will lose its EMV authorization and basically not be valid in any retailer. You can see why they can't afford to allow the biometric security to be compromised. Whether bricking the phone is the right response is another matter, but there is a lot at stake here.
 
But if Apple didn't do this and somehow touch ID information was leaked, people would go crazy cause Apple should have something in place for this. You buy an expensive iPhone, don't get it repaired at some cheap corner store shop and expect your data to still be secure and your phone to work perfectly
[doublepost=1455012890][/doublepost]
Because if because of a bogus repair fingerprint data and bank account data is lost, Apple will be so deep in lawsuits it's crazy. They do not want that, simple, get your phone repaired cheaply and unauthorized it voids the warranty and may brick the phone. Just pay the little extra to get it fixed properly. :)

But has there been even one reported incident since Touch ID was introduced 3 years ago that a repair shop hacked a phone? No, I don't believe their has been any reported incident of someone trying to steal your data, I would even state they can't, because they still need your pin number or thumbprint to access the device, I can't see them possessing the technology required to hack around the security.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Xultar



iPhone6s-back-front-250x349.jpg
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

The quote from Apple claims that they intentionally disable Touch ID and anything that relies on Touch ID - like Apple Pay, iPhone login and App logins - which is fine! That is absolutely the right thing to do in order to keep the device secure. But disabling Touch ID still leaves the user with a functional device - with the above exceptions. Users will have to login with their password or passcode and they won't be able to use Apple Pay or anything else which requires a valid fingerprint - but they will still have full access to their device, their apps, music, photos and documents and they'll be able to make and receive phone calls, FaceTime calls, send and receive iMessages and SMS messages, etc... Basically - they'll be able to do anything someone with an iPhone 5 can do! It will be as if Touch ID was not a feature on their device...

So where does "Error 53" come into play and why are phones being "bricked" and completely disabled. Apples quote says that that is not their intent - so it's either a software bug/glitch, or Apple is lying.

Given Apple's history of customer satisfaction, I'm tempted to give them the benefit of the doubt here and I'm willing to believe that the "bricked" iPhone is unintentional.

If that's the case - for free, Apple should be willing to restore your "bricked" iPhone to the state where everything works except for Touch ID. Users that also want Touch ID to work will likely have to pay Apples service fee for replacing the Touch ID sensor.

As for third party repair shops - they should be required to buy the entire assembly from Apple - the Touch ID sensor AND the matching secure enclave (which means replacing the whole system board I believe). Law or not - anything short of that will compromise the security of Touch ID. I don't see how Apple can be forced to compromise their security model.

Finally - if Apple has the ability to detect that non-Apple parts are present in a device - if like them to release an app that checks a device and identifies any non-Apple parts so that people who are purchasing a second hand device can run it and be certain that the device they are purchasing has all original parts.
 
But if Apple didn't do this and somehow touch ID information was leaked, people would go crazy cause Apple should have something in place for this. You buy an expensive iPhone, don't get it repaired at some cheap corner store shop and expect your data to still be secure and your phone to work perfectly
[doublepost=1455012890][/doublepost]
Because if because of a bogus repair fingerprint data and bank account data is lost, Apple will be so deep in lawsuits it's crazy. They do not want that, simple, get your phone repaired cheaply and unauthorized it voids the warranty and may brick the phone. Just pay the little extra to get it fixed properly. :)

Question, why do people keep bringing up the warranty?

Apple only provide 1 year (without hassle at least) and the iphone 6 is over 1 year old so there are many users out there who would have to pay for a replacement/repair even if it the repair would qualify for free under warranty.

Also, official repairs/replacements can be more than double the price of an unofficial one which is one reason why people used them.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.