Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
So, the question is, couldn't you disable TouchID, reset the device, change out the home button, re-enable TouchID? Wouldn't this get around that error?
The TouchID sensor connects directly to the logic board. The moment the phone detects that a different display (third party or not) is attached, it will prompt error 53. At AASP/ARS they calibrate the displays to re-pair TouchID to the logic board.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pianophile
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.

What if your barber was a previous auto mechanic for Honda and knows how to fix HONDAs?
Maybe he wanted an easier job?
 
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!

But isn't the point of this article that some people had their devices repaired at authorised repairers and Apple still locked their devices and considered the work done to be unauthorised. That's not acceptable, that's false advertising.
 
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?

If lexus provides a software update that bricks your lexus, they will be suffering hte same outcomes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mw360
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
 
I believe Apple's goal is to ensure any phone Apple manufactures and services meets all features and specs.

And to not have a dumb down mode that disable's features because a customer decided to go to an unauthorized repair facility that uses unauthorized parts.
That might be their goal

But in a lot of countries, including the US, thats illegal to do.
 
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...:rolleyes:

If some of the stores were authorized then Apple should cover. But if they weren't and a consumer just wanted to save a buck by using a service that is not authorized then Apple should not. This isn't just a cracked screen repair issue. It's a Touch ID issue. Which becomes a very important security issue considering what Touch ID and secure enclave presides over. In this case, anyone with half a brain would understand what's up here. And that's why this won't get any traction in a court of law.

Honestly. Just because you don't like being told when you do something the wrong way doesn't mean Apple is at fault when they lay it out clearly.

If anything, Apple will do what it always does and partner with its customers. Because that's what Apple does. Even the dumb ones who screw up and then cry about it.
 
So the Guardian originally hypes this issue and is now hyping it again by claiming lawyers ready to sue. Does anyone have hard data on how many people have actually experienced this issue?
 
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.

i'm not saying i disagree with you... but if what you say is true how is it that Apple replaced my screen on my phone.. and it still worked...?
 
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!

Solution? DON'T buy from a firm that disables devices to ensure tight control over products they have sold that may even be out of warranty...
 
I can see why some may not like this, particularly the way Apple sandbagged those with the latest iOS 9 but I do like them taking the security aspect of this seriously. Basically it's my life and bank information, I would hope it's their top priority.
 
IF apple is telling the truth, then this is a horrible design, and a weak argument to win idiots over with security fears,
good design = the sensor should not have impact on the security of the so called "secure enclave" (BTW great marketing)
 
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...:rolleyes:

Do you base your arguments solely off headlines? I can't see a single mention of repairs having occurred in authorized stores, or where. Completely unsubstantiated headline...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aidyn's X
I understand that Apple could have been concerned about security of Touch ID. But wouldn't a simpler solution be to have the software just disable Touch ID when it detects third party parts, as opposed to bricking 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 :)
 
If Apple get away with this it will not end well for us consumers. What next? Your iMac has malware, so we bricked it and you need to buy another. It's ridiculous, and that deliberately vague 'Error 53' message is just offensive. It's like they're pretending it's not them, but some random malfunction out of their control. Criminal Damage sounds about right under UK law.
 
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?
If Lexus stopped your car from being drivable when you got a third-party remote unlocking fob, despite the fact you still had the original key and could otherwise open the door and start the car this way, yes.

Disable untrusted Touch-ID sensors - fine. Delete all stored fingerprints - fine. Stop the phone being unlocked with the passcode - not fine. There is no reason to brick the phone. Apple will back down.
 
Where does it state what authorized stores had performed such a repair? I see that the article headline has the line you just quoted... but i see nothing at all in the actual article that substantiates that statement. And as someone else already pointed out... one of the qualifications for being an authorized repair center is that you must use genuine replacement parts.
The headline makes no sense and feels like an incomplete sentence.
 
If lexus provides a software update that bricks your lexus, they will be suffering hte same outcomes.

What? This isn't the same thing....if Lexus breaks Lexus system then they need to fix it plain and simple. If I buy the alpine system and have it put in and alpine breaks it then they need to fix it. If I take my Lexus to Best Buy, have the alpine put in and it doesn't work, Best Buy fixes it. None of the parties are responsible for each other. Lexus sold you the car as is, Best Buy only worked on the stereo as is, alpine built the head as is......
 
The TouchID sensor connects directly to the logic board. The moment the phone detects that a different display (third party or not) is attached, it will prompt error 53. At AASP/ARS they calibrate the displays to re-pair TouchID to the logic board.
Displays are an entirely difficult circuit from TouchID.
 
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.

Correct, and none of the press on this matter has actually said the parts used were either fake/bogus or unauthorized. The comments here and in the previous article are the ones assuming that the parts used were "non-apple". The touch ID sensor is highly specialized, most likely the same factory that make the original is the one supplying the spares. The pairing is the issue, and that's the secret sauce that Apple was witholding, and retroactively punishing users for when they had the part replaced.
 
The headline makes no sense and feels like an incomplete sentence.
Actually it does make sense, some apple stores are authorized to repair the error. As in, Apple is rolling out authorization to repair it as we speak....but it's the last paragraph you have to read for the headline to make sense
 
Apple's PR has gone downhill. They're doing a really bad job of communicating what is happening. I mean, the whole thing is bad communication - from the cryptic error message to the media coverage.

We believe that Apple may be intentionally forcing users to use their repair services, which cost much more than most third party repair shops. Where you could get your screen replaced by a neighborhood repair facility for $50-80, Apple charges $129 or more. There is incentive for Apple to keep end users from finding alternative methods to fix their products.

You see? People don't understand; screen repairs are perfectly fine as the screen itself isn't a secured component.

The one thing I don't understand is why the components are only verified when you install an OS update. That's concerning to me - does it mean somebody could install a compromised TouchID chip and go accessing my phone, as long as they don't install any updates? It should verify the secure components on every boot, and give a descriptive message explaining not that the hardware security has been compromised.

Then you don't get this mess.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dk001 and macfacts
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.