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

[kevinof]

It's nothing to do with getting it repaired cheaply. If it's a genuine apple part, which it is, then why can't I take MY Iphone to wherever I want and get it repaired. Nothing to do with touch id info being leaked. Yes I might void my warranty but that's my call. It's my Iphone after all, not Apples.

This is Apple saying that you MUST have it serviced at one of their authorized repair centres or we will destroy your property. It's anti-competitive, it's bordering on criminal destruction of property and very poor decision making on the part of Apple.

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.

 

[SvenSvenson]

hope they win megabucks from this

I bet you'd also like people to sue Apple if you could tamper with the touch-Id system on a stolen phone and start using someone else's Appek Pay method?

 

[LovingTeddy]

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.

This error sees only affects iPhone 6/6 Plus and iPhone 6s/6s Plus.

If Apple really want prevent bogus TouchID sensor, why iPhone 5S does not do same thing?

Is there any case where people installed 3rd party components and has their financial data leaked? No... Otherwis, it will be all over the news. But it did not happen

 

[tenly]

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.

Wow. Just wow.

90% or more of the posts in this chain are ridiculous - yours included.

45% of people are claiming that Apple has DELIBERATELY rendered phones useless and they claim it to be sleazy and illegal and are demanding that Apple be punished. Those people are overreacting because there is no evidence that this was done DELIBERATELY and plenty of evidence that this was NOT what was intended! Trolls.

And the other 50% are making equally ridiculous claims that bricking the phones is exactly the right thing for Apple to do in this case in order to preserve security! Again - there is evidence that the "bricking" is unintentional. Are these same people going to be upset when Apple corrects the problem and only disabled Touch ID? LOL. Dumb.

Less than 5% of the messages in this thread are worth reading. That's about 30 messages out of over 600.

People. Relax. Sit back and watch what happens over the next week or two. I guarantee it will turn out to be a big non-event!

 

[kevinof]

What's ridiculous about it? I was only stating facts. Apple have rendered useless iphones it's doesn't own. Having dealt with Apple before (in a previous life) I can tell you that the action to disable a device when they detect a replacement id was not taken by some intern on $5 an hour. Decisions like this are taken at a high level and reviewed by business owners in detail. That's how Apple works.

this was not some random ad-hoc decision. If it was then there's a bigger problem with Apple and that's management oversight.

Wow. Just wow.

90% or more of the posts in this chain are ridiculous - yours included.

45% of people are claiming that Apple has DELIBERATELY rendered phones useless and they claim it to be sleazy and illegal and are demanding that Apple be punished. Those people are overreacting because there is no evidence that this was done DELIBERATELY and plenty of evidence that this was NOT what was intended! Trolls.

And the other 50% are making equally ridiculous claims that bricking the phones is exactly the right thing for Apple to do in this case in order to preserve security! Again - there is evidence that the "bricking" is unintentional. Are these same people going to be upset when Apple corrects the problem and only disabled Touch ID? LOL. Dumb.

Less than 5% of the messages in this thread are worth reading. That's about 30 messages out of over 600.

People. Relax. Sit back and watch what happens over the next week or two. I guarantee it will turn out to be a big non-event!

 

[Jax44]

What a lot of people are also ignoring on here is that Apple devices have a disproportionate amount of screen breakages. Any third party repairer will tell you that the majority of phones that come in for fixing have broken screens and that the majority of those are Apple devices.

It is really interesting how so many come on here to defend Apple. There is one reason and only one reason why Apple has crippled these phones and it is nothing to do with security.

Do tell...

 

[Recognition]

Is there any case where people installed 3rd party components and has their financial data leaked? No... Otherwis, it will be all over the news. But it did not happen

Surely prevention is better than cure?
Why wait for a disaster to happen, that you know you could prevent, then fix it afterwards?

 

[You are the One]

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.

Not at all. A more logical conclusion is that Apple designed a secure system and that tampering with it (by e.g. introducing non-authorised spare parts or in any other way effecting its chain of security functions), it will no longer function. This is to protect themselves as well as their customers.

Further on, this information is no secret, it is communicated to all customers. (Most of whom won't bother to read and understand the conditions set when buying one of their products)

Ignorance is no defence, unless you pledge insanity, which I think people who are not able to comprehend written text should do. Insane customers won't stand a chance in court though.

So good luck.

 

[H2SO4]

I bet you'd also like people to sue Apple if you could tamper with the touch-Id system on a stolen phone and start using someone else's Appek Pay method?

Not sure that holds any water.
Has anybody ever sued Microsoft, (or Apple for that matter), because their OS had a security hole? Do you sue Yale, (the locksmiths), because somebody picked your lock or BMW because your car got hot wired?

 

[viewfly]

Back in 2013 it was known that even switching IDsensors between two iPhones would cause failure. Not bricking, but non ID operation. The ID sensor is tagged to each chip. An Apple tech had to re pair it properly.

So maybe Apple became aware that shops found a way around this; a security breech.

So in order round up malicious persons they bricked all unpaired ID, as a one time operation. Unfortunately,some honest persons were affected. But you can't warn criminals. Otherwise they would not update.

And that is all it is.

Back in the day, I wished that Apple would take the IMEI of my stolen phone and prevent anyone from registering with iTunes with it. But they didn't.

So I'm with Apple on this one.
So now that the cat is out if the bag,it's over.

PS: I think you can only get a smart key replacement for you car at the dealer.

 

[AFDoc]

No, Apple isn't checking for EVERY part to make sure it's not 3rd Party. To make a comparable argument Lexus would have to limit its check to those parts that put the security of the passengers at risk.

Who makes the determination what puts someone at risk? The one that wants to force you to pay a higher price to fix the issue?
[doublepost=1455020881][/doublepost]

And if they put that in because there's possibility of non-authorized shops putting in something that can compromise something serious? Like there have been some exploits that were discovered with GM software on some of their cars that can perhaps be used to take control of their vehicles? Perhaps changing out some controller part would allow that kind of an issue to be exploited?

So because something may cause an issue (per the manufacturer) my car should be made inoperable? You live in a weird world if that's what you believe.... a world I'm glad there are laws to protect those, like me, that don't wish to be part of that world.
[doublepost=1455020937][/doublepost]

No, Apple isn't checking for EVERY part to make sure it's not 3rd Party. To make a comparable argument Lexus would have to limit its check to those parts that put the security of the passengers at risk.

Ok fine... any part. third party parts don't put anyone or anything at risk.

 

[ecw0647]

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

[doublepost=1455021658][/doublepost]I'm not a big conspiracy nut and don't believe Apple did this to freeze out third-party repair shops, who, after all provide an important resource for many people who don't have access to an Apple Store. That would clearly be a violation of the anti-trust laws. I suspect it's simply one of those unintended consequences that no one foresaw and will be fixed by Apple as soon as they get their act together. On the other hand, it's this kind of constant problems with OS updates and lack of testing (or inattention) to software in favor of hardware, that's driving many to Android devices.

 

[spazzcat]

Interesting issue here:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/error-53-and-updates.1955314/#post-22551202

User has bought an iPhone second hand. What if he updates it and it bricks? That would be a particularly harsh situation.

This perfect reason for this, he could have a comprised touch id and not even know it...
[doublepost=1455021862][/doublepost]

This error sees only affects iPhone 6/6 Plus and iPhone 6s/6s Plus.

If Apple really want prevent bogus TouchID sensor, why iPhone 5S does not do same thing?

Is there any case where people installed 3rd party components and has their financial data leaked? No... Otherwis, it will be all over the news. But it did not happen

You couldn't pay for things with an iPhone 5s.

 

[clibinarius]

I may be incorrect, but I believe that in the terms of use Apple states using unauthorized 3rd party repair shops may void your warranty and lead to unexpected results, even those rendering the device unusable.

Solution? DON'T utilize unauthorized 3rd parties!

That's why I only do what Apple tells me to do. I may be out of warranty, but Apple can come along and brick my device any minute due to "protecting the customer" and they're right. I'm wrong.

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?

You're right. Lexus isn't liable if there's nothing wrong with the car after the repair, and they randomly decide to shut the car down. Because, Apple should dictate our lives and make sure everything is an authentic part. Don't use Lexus window wipers? Shut it down! Not using a Lexus rear view mirror? You, sir, do not deserve a Lexus.

Alternate universe headline:

Law firms consider suing Apple after malicious third-party home buttons lead to widespread Apple Pay theft.

I generally have the money to get my repairs done by Apple. Fine. I do. But at the same time, Apple didn't release the malicious third-party home buttons, and they didn't randomly change the rules about their use nuking the phone. If Apple was going to do something like this, it should've been done not as a rule change mid game, which would force people to spend money on further costly affairs, when the situation didn't previously exist, and Apple didn't say it was going to happen.

 

[Xultar]

The issue here is I shouldn't be beholden to Apple for repairs for the life of my device after the warranty.

I can't believe so many people are backing apple on this. They deserve to be sued. No company should be allowed to brick a device if you didn't take it back to them for service. That's ridiculous.
[doublepost=1455022972][/doublepost]

As always, people continue to not take responsibility for their actions. You violated the terms of your agreement, voided your warrenty to save a few bucks, now you need to spend a thousand....oh well

First the article specifically states that they took it to authorized dealers. You have to remember that there are some places where Apple stores are not close.

But OK then let's say I accept what you say as a requirement during the warranty period.

Then, what about after the warranty. I shouldn't be required to take my phone to apple after my warranty. That is illegal.

 

[You are the One]

Then, what about after the warranty. I shouldn't be required to take my phone to apple after my warranty. That is illegal.

No it's not. You agreed to these conditions when you bought the device.

Maybe next time you and others will RTFM and the FEULA before you invest in technical products that are important to you.

Whining like cry-babies afterwords is cute but won't stand in court.

 

[Jeans01Ddk]

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

There's ONE universal solution to this and that is that Apple starts selling GENUINE spare parts to third party compagnies... then we would never have seen this situation... and everyone would be glad (well except for APPLE)
If my Volkswagen breaks down and I choose to go to my trusted garage, they can order ANY GENUINE part from the local Volkswagen dealer... even if it's the control module for the central locking system. but I don't have to pay the Volkswagen dealer 200$ an hour but can get cheaper labour but genuine parts at my local garage... How come I can't do the same with my iPhone? If Apple would sell an original fingerprint scanner to the local repairshop in Bosnia, I could do the same as with my car! It's down to GREED from Apples side because they can charge whatever they want if I don't want to break the security of my iPhone... And that's supposed to be the "free marked forced that regulates the marked"? Bull... that's MONOPOLY, and I hope that at least here in the EU the govnerments will stop that... but I see no hope for the USA because Apple must have an enormous lobbyism there...

 

[yg17]

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?

This would be more like you took your Lexus into a non-dealership repair shop, and they put in non-factory replacement parts, then Lexus disabled your car even though it was working fine because you went to a non-Lexus shop.

 

[Fenez]

Surely prevention is better than cure?
Why wait for a disaster to happen, that you know you could prevent, then fix it afterwards?

That's ridiculous because there is no evidence to say that anyone can even produce a hacked sensor that will allow some kind of security breech.

 

[emm386]

Maybe next time you and others will RTFM and the FEULA before you invest in technical products that are important to you.

Whining like cry-babies afterwords is cute but won't stand in court.

...and neither would many of Apple's EULA-terms...

 

[kdarling]

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.

People are already going crazy now. The difference is, Apple would not be liable for security leaks caused by third party items. Whereas they could be on the hook here for destroying personal property.

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.

- As pointed out many times, the warranty cannot be voided simply by using third party parts. This is not about voiding the warranty, as much as it is about bricking a phone.

- As for being a security liability, I sure wouldn't take that angle if I were Apple. After all, the check is only done during an OS update to a certain version. Which means IF there was such a thing as a part that could spy on the user's prints, then it's likely already been doing it for some time with no check by Apple. Plus apparently if you install the part AFTER the update, it can continue to spy on you. - So much for "security".

In reality, the "security" aspect is pretty far fetched. Someone would have to R&D and build (for cheap, so they'd be bought) sensors that had the ability to store owner fingerprints. Then at some future time the phone would have to be stolen by someone with knowledge that you had his special sensor installed. And THEN do something like recognize the thief's fingerprints, and substitute the original owners print data for the secure enclave to authenticate. AND hope the owner was one of the relatively few with Apple Pay set up.

 

[Muscle Master]

Fact of the matter is... Apple is being freaking greedy, if they want repairs done in house... They need to lower their prices... Period, they have insane margins as it is... Do the right thing and don't Nickle and dime your loyal fan base

That's half the issue, the other issues is the logistics of the repair... Why can't Apple authorize or partner up with these small repair shops/kiosk with OEM parts and a small percentage fee vs opening a store in a unknown region... What's cheaper?

 

[Jeans01Ddk]

And to all the contributors here who believe that Apple are in their full right to destroy the property of others, in order to guarantee that the Apple ID in no way can get compromised, I would like to ask you if you really believe that you can contact Apple and say: "Look someone has pulled $ 100,000 from my bank account because they have abused my iPhone, and since it is the original fingerprint scanner that's on the phone, I demand you (Apple) to pay me the full amount... and then Apple would pay the amount without blinking? I think you are in for a very big surprise... You would probably have to drag them to the court, and Apple would demand that YOU could prove that it's the fingerprint scanners fault... and how would you do that? You would never be able to that, so the lesson here is: don't put ANY privat information ANYWHERE else than in your head, because ANY security system has it's flaws... be it on an iPhone, on the web or a snippet of paper...

 

[igorsky]

This is awesome. Let's protect all the idiots who take their $1000 device to Joe Shmo with a screwdriver and allow him to tinker with one of the phone's most vital components. While we're at it, I'm going to go buy a Ferrari and take it to the mechanic around the corner to fine tune the engine. Yeah, he's completely unqualified, but he's cheap! And it's my goddamned right to own luxury goods even though I can't afford to maintain them! And if he screws up and triggers some sort of security fail-safe it's ok, because I'll just sue Ferrari! I love America!

 

[PlainviewX]

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

That's analogy draws no comparison to what this about. It's not even close.

If you want an analogy that works... "Should I bring my European car to a service center that services all foreign, and domestic, automobiles and may, or may not, use OEM parts?"