Test Suggests Face ID on iPhone 13 Doesn't Work After Screen Replacement By Third Party

[SanderEvers]

Basically this blocks someone from replacing the screen with a low quality one, or one with a hacked face-id chip from stealing your data.

So yeah, I'm with Apple on this one. It's a security feature. And in my book security > right to repair.

However Apple should add a self test to the OS to check if a screen is a genuine Apple screen. If so, faceId shouldn't blocked.

 

[gmacarthur]

People seem to think it is only members of the public that purchase iphone and thus there is no need for this type of security. What they fail to understand is that criminals use iphones too and thus there needs to be a way to prevent them from using face ID to access someone elses phone.

The display module has nothing to do with Face ID. This has nothing to do with security.

 

[gmacarthur]

Basically this blocks someone from replacing the screen with a low quality one, or one with a hacked face-id chip from stealing your data.

So yeah, I'm with Apple on this one. It's a security feature. And in my book security > right to repair.

However Apple should add a self test to the OS to check if a screen is a genuine Apple screen. If so, faceId shouldn't blocked.

Has nothing to do with screen quality or security. The display module has nothing to do with Face ID and swapping two iPhones genuine screens still disables it. It’s about serialised parts and limiting third party repair only.

 

[Marli]

If 3rd party repairers could get access to Apple parts, would that fix the issue?

 

[twistedpixel8]

Shouldn’t be ok during any period. That’s like a car requiring OEM tires at all times. Nothing in the display is associated with the TrueDepth camera system.

Most car manufacturers do require OEM parts to be used during warranty period or the warranty can be invalidated. Same with servicing at an authorized dealer. Ok not tyres but just about everything else.

I’m not saying that’s OK but it is absolutely true - even in “we love our consumer protection laws” Europe.

 

[inket]

First, phone theft was rampant, then Apple came up with iCloud activation lock.
What did thieves do? Start stealing phones to sell for parts.

This is to say I like a phone where every component is paired so that's not possible anymore.

Right to repair should be about forcing these companies to make the repairs affordable (i.e. $30 for a new glass, not $400 or whatever) not giving some randoms manuals they don't understand so they can ruin your phone even more and claim it's repaired.

Have every company submit a list of all the components and their cost and force repairs to be the cost of (broken component) + labor, and nothing more. This will directly cause manufacturers to make their components more durable too.

 

[h3nrch]

Apple runs its own Independent iPhone Repair Program, which is designed to allow any company or third-party repair center to become an authorized Apple service provider only if they meet the requirements and go through the process.

Apple has expanded the program to more countries worldwide, but compared to fully independent third-party repair providers, authorized Apple outlets often have higher prices, longer wait times, and poor customer service. Companies and stores certified through Apple get access to genuine Apple parts, manuals, and device instructions, including information not available to third-party repair stores.

These paragraphs are verbatim party-line Apple PR talking points. And while I’m sure many of us really do appreciate your deference to the horse’s mouth, it might be better to use quotes to represent corporate propaganda rather than tarnish your own credibility.

 

[0924487]

If Apple really cares about the users, they should allow this to "trust" the component after the user choose to wipe the iPhone after the third-party part change.

 

[gmacarthur]

Most car manufacturers do require OEM parts to be used during warranty period or the warranty can be invalidated. Same with servicing at an authorized dealer. Ok not tyres but just about everything else.

I’m not saying that’s OK but it is absolutely true - even in “we love our consumer protection laws” Europe.

invalidating a warranty is different than disabling features you paid for.

it would be like a car manufacturer disabling the fuel gauge when you replaced the fuel tank. Or disabling the windscreen wipers when you got a non oem windscreen.

 

[Six0Four]

While this is silly of Apple to do, who is going to put in an after market $150 or $200 display in their iPhone 13 when you can just get Apple to put in a genuine one for $279?

 

[Abazigal]

I want to give Apple the benefit of the doubt on this one. Maybe there’s a fear that if an unauthorized party swapped the display, they could’ve somehow tampered with the Face ID module before hand, which would hamper security.

I think as with many things Apple does, it ultimately comes down to a desire for control over the end user experience.

In order to have a thriving gray market (for 2nd-hand iPhones), you need a system in place to service older iPhones. The two parts of the iphone that typically need servicing would be the battery and the screen. Apple likely wants to retain some control over these repairs, which either boils down to the user getting the device replaced at a local Apple Store, or with an authorised third party repair store.

 

[NightFox]

Most car manufacturers do require OEM parts to be used during warranty period or the warranty can be invalidated. Same with servicing at an authorized dealer. Ok not tyres but just about everything else.

I’m not saying that’s OK but it is absolutely true - even in “we love our consumer protection laws” Europe.

Actually, no - all manufacturers can require is that servicing is in accordance with their prescribed servicing schedule (e.g. oil to the correct grade changed at 18,000 miles).

Plus, it's been ruled that for a manufacturer to attempt to decline a warranty repair on the basis of a third-party component being previously used, they would have to be able to establish and demonstrate that the fault was caused by that third-party component.

That's in Europe anyway, not sure about the rest of the world.

 

[Mydel]

People seem to think it is only members of the public that purchase iphone and thus there is no need for this type of security. What they fail to understand is that criminals use iphones too and thus there needs to be a way to prevent them from using face ID to access someone elses phone.

And what does it have to do with swapping Apple screen to Apple screen? No matter how apple sells it its just another step in limiting our right to repair gadgets.

 

[jadot]

Sounds like Apple doesn't want you taking your precious iPhones to the third party.

D'ya think??

/s

 

[Mydel]

Basically this blocks someone from replacing the screen with a low quality one, or one with a hacked face-id chip from stealing your data.

What are you talking about. Screen has no chip

So yeah, I'm with Apple on this one. It's a security feature. And in my book security > right to repair.

Eeeee nope. Its a choice.

However Apple should add a self test to the OS to check if a screen is a genuine Apple screen. If so, faceId shouldn't blocked.

What is even genuine Apple screen. The one you can buy comes from either factory making Apple screens or are refurbished.

 

[Desforado]

Update: According to the video mentioned below, even if an iPhone 13 display is replaced with a genuine and original iPhone 13 screen, Face ID will stop working. In the video, the repair provider swapped two original iPhone 13 screens and in both cases, Face ID was inoperative after the new screens were installed. It seems to be the case that if the original screen is put back with the original iPhone 13, Face ID returns, ruling out the possibility of an improper installation.

If a customer gets their iPhone 13 display replaced by a third-party repair store or provider, such as those not licensed or affiliated with Apple through its Independent Repair Program, Face ID on the iPhone will no longer be useable.

Apple has long faced criticism for making it difficult for third-party repair stores and providers to fix and repair their products. Apple already displays a prompt for customers inside Settings that informs them that their display is a "non-genuine display," and a similar prompt for "non-genuine cameras" was introduced earlier this year.

Apple claims these prompts help inform customers that they aren't using genuine Apple parts and is part of its more comprehensive plan to ensure customer devices are only repaired and diagnosed by certified Apple technicians.

With the iPhone 13 this year, Apple further makes it more difficult for customers to get repairs from third-party stores and providers. As discovered in a repair video, the iPhone 13 screen includes no components for Face ID to function, as all the parts for the TrueDepth system are housed in the iPhone itself.

Despite this, if an iPhone 13 display is replaced with a "non-genuine" or even a genuine, original iPhone 13 display, Face ID stops working, despite there seemingly being no hardware within the display itself needed for Face ID to function.
Apple runs its own Independent iPhone Repair Program, which is designed to allow any company or third-party repair center to become an authorized Apple service provider only if they meet the requirements and go through the process.

Apple has expanded the program to more countries worldwide, but compared to fully independent third-party repair providers, authorized Apple outlets often have higher prices, longer wait times, and poor customer service. Companies and stores certified through Apple get access to genuine Apple parts, manuals, and device instructions, including information not available to third-party repair stores.

Given the lack of hardware reasoning for the iPhone 13's Face ID to no longer be usable after a third-party screen is installed, Apple could patch this via an iOS update if it's a simple iOS 15 bug. Keeping in mind its past efforts to consolidate iPhone repairs to only stores and centers it chooses to consider "authorized," however, this is unlikely to be a mistake and will only further fuel the Right to Repair movement. We've reached out to Apple for comment.

Article Link: Test Suggests Face ID on iPhone 13 Doesn't Work After Screen Replacement By Third Party

Pretty cynical - even by Apple's standards.

 

[Macropanda]

During warranty period, maybe ok. Outside warranty, definitely not ok.

Even during warranty it should be allowed but at most, void your warranty. Its understandable that Apple don't want you trying to get a replacement during warranty when a potential substandard repair has been carried out. But if you choose to accept that and go ahead anyway there is no reason to stop a feature working.

 

[twistedpixel8]

invalidating a warranty is different than disabling features you paid for.

it would be like a car manufacturer disabling the fuel gauge when you replaced the fuel tank. Or disabling the windscreen wipers when you got a non oem windscreen.

But they’re disabling a security feature (Face ID) likely because the new display could potentially have a malicious chip that attempts to sniff for facial geometry data. Or at least that will be their reasoning on a PR level.

 

[twistedpixel8]

What are you talking about. Screen has no chip

Yeah, OEM ones don’t. Third party ones could very well have one, unbeknown to the consumer. Much like these new malicious USB cables.

 

[Berserker-UK]

I can see an argument for rejecting fake parts, but not one for rejecting Apple's own parts just because you don't have the (expensive) certification.

Besides, I don't rate Apple's own repairs as being better than third party ones anyway - last time I took an iPhone to Genius Bar for repair they broke the phone so badly it had to be replaced. The replacement also broke a few months later (conveniently for Apple, out of warranty).

 

[Jim Lahey]

I recall a similar situation with Touch ID when users were trying to fit black fascias to the product red iPhones. Turned out there was a valid reason on that occasion.

 

[MathersMahmood]

Apple just needs to stop this. People will get a repair directly from their stores or a third party repair shop. They're still using the product.

Their batteries are too expensive in my opinion it should be £20 max.

 

[spartan1967]

This is low, even by Apple’s philosophy of being to squeeze as much money out of an iPhone owner even after they spend hundreds of dollars (now almost thousands) on a new cell.

 

[MrWeenus]

I will get thrown under the bus here, but I agree with apple locking down repairs 100%. I have seen so many apple products with counterfeit parts that did not work correctly after the "repair".

I'd rather pay a premium, but know for sure that these parts are 100% genuine. I'm sick and tired of shady phone repair shops.

 

[macar00n]

This is why I always have my iPhone screen a replaced by a 4th party