Apple acknowledges 'Error 53' glitch, says it's part of Touch ID security [u]

13567

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 140
    Really Mr. Cook, a security issue; that's how you defend this buffoonery?  If it was just a security issue, why not just disable the Touch ID functionality instead of the entire phone?!  Get ready for another expensive lawsuit.  
    singularity
  • Reply 42 of 140
    Awesome news.

    Where do you think third party repair shops are getting their Touch ID sensors? From Apple?

    More likely these are "harvested" parts from stolen iPhones, since most stolen iPhones now can't be resold due to Activation Lock.

    Now that crooks have one less part to harvest it will further reduce the value of a stolen device. 
    anantksundarampscooter63argonaut
  • Reply 43 of 140
    volcanvolcan Posts: 1,799member
    maestro64 said:

    I agree with everything but the bolded statement. You only void the warranty while it is in warranty. After warranty period is over you are free to do with your phone as you like and you live with the consequence of those activity. Apple can not deny to fix it if you are willing to pay to have it fix outside warranty even if you had work done elsewhere.  I hear in car forums all the time people do not want to pay to play, meaning if you going to modify your car and work on it yourself and you screw something up in the process it does not mean the manufactures has to fix your problems free of charge even in warranty.
    I'm not so sure Apple has to accept it for repair at all if it has been tampered with, warranty or no warranty. Just like the car analogy. The dealer is not obligated to take the car in for repair if it has been modified in such a way that they cannot guarantee their work. If you bored and stroked your engine, put a hot cam and a blower and took it into your dealer saying there is a funny noise coming from under the hood, they would just laugh and tell you SOL.
    edited February 2016
  • Reply 44 of 140
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    apple ][ said:
    cnocbui said:
    Apple are probably going to get sued over this.  It is something intentionally built into iOS 9.  Deliberately incapacitating an iPhone someone has paid a lot of money for is probably illegal in the EU.

    Imagine if car manufacturers did this.  You put aftermarket brake pads on it, then later take it in f or a dealer service and they update the firmware in the ECU.  You go back to pick up your car and they say 'sorry, mate, the new firmware has detected you fitted non genuine brake pads and has disabled your car - you will have to buy a new one.

    Yeah, I can see people saying 'Oh... ok.  Fair enough.'
    Any morons out there are free to sue if they so desire.

    Do you even have an iPhone? You've been anti-Apple for as long as I can remember.

    You should just buy an Android phone, as it seems that you would be much happier with such a phone, as the Android mentality is obviously better suited for you.

    Good for Apple for taking security seriously, despite the protests of a few confused people who wish for iPhones to be less secure. Apple can't allow any two bit, unauthorized technicians to tamper with the security of their phones! What planet do you live on?  

    I also find your analogy to be rather lacking. Apple is not going to disable any phones if somebody goes and gets their screen fixed, as that doesn't directly relate to the security of the phone. But if somebody goes ahead and tampers with Touch ID, then you better believe that Apple is 100% in the right for bricking any such phones.
    I don't have an iPhone, I did buy one for my daughter.

    There is no 'Android mentality' that is just you being typically supercilious and displaying your usual overblown sense of self-importance.

    I think you don't grasp the concept of property ownership.  I find it very peculiar that someone with your history of expressing far-right thought patterns should think it appropriate for any company or individual  to deal with your property as if it belonged to them.  What planet do you live on?

    I formulated my analogy on reading that people who had had an 'unathorised repair' and later updated to iOS9, essentially had their phone bricked by Apple on-purpose.  These repairs have been allowed in the past, it is only iOS 9 that has this added security feature.  Apple should have issued a prominent public warning so people could choose not to upgrade the OS.  Bricking people's phones deliberately without cause or warning is inexcusable.  The phones do not belong to Apple.  Saying it is necessary for security is BS because in many cases any potential security breach occurred some time in the past when people had their phones repaired.  Bricking the phones now doesn't repair a security breach, it just stuffs their phone.


    edited February 2016 staticx57singularityargonaut
  • Reply 45 of 140
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    cnocbui said:
    gatorguy said:
    Absolutely the way it should be done. Anyone complaining about it hasn't thought thru the possible even if unlikely consequences of it not working that way.
    Ireland doesn't have an Apple store. I'm not sure about authorised repairers who could do the job. Why isn't there an option for getting Apple to do the authorisation and not having to get a new phone?
    Are there authorized repair facilities in Ireland? Then when they do a sensor repair they re-authenticate the new component. Voiding the warranty with an unauthorized repair service doesn't mean the phone has to be replaced just that the fix will cost.

    Hence: "There is nothing illogical about supposing Apple could do the authorisation after a 3rd part repair attempt.", yes for a standard technology repair fee.
    edited February 2016
  • Reply 46 of 140
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    cnocbui said:
    Apple are probably going to get sued over this.  It is something intentionally built into iOS 9.  Deliberately incapacitating an iPhone someone has paid a lot of money for is probably illegal in the EU.

    Imagine if car manufacturers did this.  You put aftermarket brake pads on it, then later take it in f or a dealer service and they update the firmware in the ECU.  You go back to pick up your car and they say 'sorry, mate, the new firmware has detected you fitted non genuine brake pads and has disabled your car - you will have to buy a new one.

    Yeah, I can see people saying 'Oh... ok.  Fair enough.'

    Most desperately irrelevant analogy of the day. 

    If a car could detect that some backstreet dealer had replaced the brake pads with a cheap set of bathroom sponges, then you can bet your life that the manufacturers would prevent you from starting the engine. 

    Stop throwing crap analogies at the wall and hoping they stick. 
    williamlondonanantksundaramSpamSandwichericthehalfbeeawilliams87pscooter63maxitargonautbestkeptsecret
  • Reply 47 of 140
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    jfc1138 said:
    cnocbui said:
    Ireland doesn't have an Apple store. I'm not sure about authorised repairers who could do the job. Why isn't there an option for getting Apple to do the authorisation and not having to get a new phone?
    Are there authorized repair facilities in Ireland? Then when they do a sensor repair they re-authenticate the new component. Voiding the warranty with an unauthorized repair service doesn't mean the phone has to be replaced just that the fix will cost.

    Hence: "There is nothing illogical about supposing Apple could do the authorisation after a 3rd part repair attempt.", yes for a standard technology repair fee.
    There appear to be repairers claiming to be Apple authorised so there probably are.  In the past I have had to return a defective Apple product to the Netherlands for replacement and the turn-around was over three weeks.
  • Reply 48 of 140
    cnocbui said:
    apple ][ said:
    Any morons out there are free to sue if they so desire.

    Do you even have an iPhone? You've been anti-Apple for as long as I can remember.

    You should just buy an Android phone, as it seems that you would be much happier with such a phone, as the Android mentality is obviously better suited for you.

    Good for Apple for taking security seriously, despite the protests of a few confused people who wish for iPhones to be less secure. Apple can't allow any two bit, unauthorized technicians to tamper with the security of their phones! What planet do you live on?  

    I also find your analogy to be rather lacking. Apple is not going to disable any phones if somebody goes and gets their screen fixed, as that doesn't directly relate to the security of the phone. But if somebody goes ahead and tampers with Touch ID, then you better believe that Apple is 100% in the right for bricking any such phones.
    I don't have an iPhone, I did buy one for my daughter.

    There is no 'Android mentality' that is just you being typically supercilious and displaying your usual overblown sense of self-importance.

    I think you don't grasp the concept of property ownership.  I find it very peculiar that someone with your history of expressing far-right thought patterns should think it appropriate for any company or individual  to deal with your property as if it belonged to them.  What planet do you live on?

    I formulated my analogy on reading that people who had had an 'unathorised repair' and later updated to iOS9, essentially had their phone bricked by Apple on-purpose.  These repairs have been allowed in the past, it is only iOS 9 that has this added security feature.  Apple should have issued a prominent public warning so people could choose not to upgrade the OS.  Bricking people's phones deliberately without cause or warning is inexcusable.  The phones do not belong to Apple.  Saying it is necessary for security is BS because in many cases any potential security breach occurred some time in the past when people had their phones repaired.  Bricking the phones now doesn't repair a security breach, it just stuffs their phone.
    Oh ffs, what a load of crap, YOU are so anti-Apple and even more so you are always argumentative about everything. Talk about overblown sense of self-importance!
    edited February 2016 anantksundaramai46ericthehalfbeepscooter63maxitargonautbestkeptsecret
  • Reply 49 of 140
    Almost certainly, replacing the touch sensor will cause any sensor-associated or sensor-derived data to be cleared. Even if Apple does it, I suspect. You'll have to re-enter your fingerprints - which is not that hard. And re-add your ApplePay cards - also not that hard.
  • Reply 50 of 140
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    linkman said:
    Why not fix the problem by having iOS wipe out the data in the secure enclave/Touch ID, thus ensuring the data is not compromised instead of bricking it? Or at least let the phone work without use of Touch ID (yikes, it'd be like using an iPhone 5). Yes, this would allow non-Apple authorized repairs to actually succeed and possibly deprive Apple of a bit of revenue. As for the person quoted in the Guardian article that lost all of his/her data: backup your stuff! Data-wise this is no different than losing your iPhone. Apple makes it so easy to backup and restore that there should be no excuses. If you value the information then back it up.
    Good question. I don't know why Apple decided to brick the whole phone but I'm glad they did. I don't want Apple to assume they're smarter than a determined hacker with a touchId repair kit. 

    If my phone is stolen, and the thief decides to replace the touchId mechanism then I am 100% sure that I want that phone bricked beyond recovery. 
    cornchip
  • Reply 51 of 140
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    And what idiot takes an £800 gadget to an unauthorised repair dealer without backing it up first?
    SpamSandwichargonaut
  • Reply 52 of 140
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    markbyrn said:
    Really Mr. Cook, a security issue; that's how you defend this buffoonery?  If it was just a security issue, why not just disable the Touch ID functionality instead of the entire phone?!  Get ready for another expensive lawsuit.  
    Because it's better to be safer than compromised. How does Apple know that some bright spark won't find a way to re-enable the TouchId and gain access to your data by exploiting an undiscovered vulnerability in iOS?
    edited February 2016
  • Reply 53 of 140
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member

    plovell said:
    Almost certainly, replacing the touch sensor will cause any sensor-associated or sensor-derived data to be cleared. 
    'Almost certainly' doesn't really give me the feeling you know for sure. 
    edited February 2016
  • Reply 54 of 140
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 3,192member
    I wonder what prevents Apple from checking the Touch ID sensor every time an iPhone is booted, thus indicating immediately that a sensor repair wasn't performed satisfactorily (or that the hardware has been otherwise tampered with) and perhaps clearing the contents of the Secure Enclave (only) if the iPhone is still allowed to be used. Checking the sensor only when a system software update is installed will typically come way too late in the game and suggests Apple didn't really think through this sensor pairing business.
    edited February 2016
  • Reply 55 of 140
    First of all, who is the moron that even took their device to a 3rd party repair person? Yes, you're gonna pay more if you have Apple do it, but I'd rather have that then take it to said service. Second, I 10000000% agree with this security feature and would like to see it in OTHER Mac products (such as the MacBook, etc.)
  • Reply 56 of 140
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 3,192member
    danuff said:
    First of all, who is the moron that even took their device to a 3rd party repair person? Yes, you're gonna pay more if you have Apple do it, but I'd rather have that then take it to said service. Second, I 10000000% agree with this security feature and would like to see it in OTHER Mac products (such as the MacBook, etc.)
    Desperate people do specious things all the time. They don't have to be innately "morons".
  • Reply 57 of 140
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    Rayz2016 said:
    cnocbui said:
    Apple are probably going to get sued over this.  It is something intentionally built into iOS 9.  Deliberately incapacitating an iPhone someone has paid a lot of money for is probably illegal in the EU.

    Imagine if car manufacturers did this.  You put aftermarket brake pads on it, then later take it in f or a dealer service and they update the firmware in the ECU.  You go back to pick up your car and they say 'sorry, mate, the new firmware has detected you fitted non genuine brake pads and has disabled your car - you will have to buy a new one.

    Yeah, I can see people saying 'Oh... ok.  Fair enough.'

    Most desperately irrelevant analogy of the day. 

    If a car could detect that some backstreet dealer had replaced the brake pads with a cheap set of bathroom sponges, then you can bet your life that the manufacturers would prevent you from starting the engine. 

    Stop throwing crap analogies at the wall and hoping they stick. 
    The analogy has been seized upon by other commentators:

    The bricking problem has been labelled the “error 53″ bug and Apple is fully aware of it. Unfortunately, if it is deliberate, then in the EU the practice is probably illegal in EU as a restraint of trade. If not, them the automotive companies could have a field day.


    The journalist also considers, as I do, that this action will probably prove to be illegal. I do my own car repairs. I currently have non-genuine front brake pads on my car. They undoubtedly exceed the manufacturers own specifications for that component.
    edited February 2016
  • Reply 58 of 140
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,454member
    williamh said:.  
    Good lord, that's how I thought it worked all along.  The TouchID chip is linked to something on the motherboard so it can't just be replaced.  I had a 5s with a broken screen and I ripped the touch ID cable when I was replacing it.  I researched it and learned that touchID was gone for good.  I installed an iPhone 5 home button and all was well except no Touch ID.  I since sold that phone.  I recently repaired a 5s for someone else and took care to 1) not rip the cable and 2) transfer the Touch ID assembly to the new display assembly.  I assume that this will present no problem.  
    Interesting. I just upgraded my 5s to 9.2.1 and my Touch ID no longer works. The setup screen jumps to a failure message. I wonder if that's the 5s version of this 6 Error 53? I haven't had time to get it to an Apple Store yet to diagnose, but the support chat person told me the 9.2.1 update "exposed a weakness" in the hardware. On a side note: this phone was an Apple replacement for warranty issue a little over a year ago. Since it was likely a refurbished phone, is it possible that the company Apple outsources repairs to didn't follow procedure exactly? Curious.
    edited February 2016 cornchipargonaut
  • Reply 59 of 140

    Apple acknowledges 'Error 53' glitch, says it's part of Touch ID security"

    This security feature was intentionally implemented.


    Therefore, it is not a glitch.
    ai46cornchippscooter63maxit
  • Reply 60 of 140
    bobschlobbobschlob Posts: 1,074member
    markbyrn said:
    Really Mr. Cook, a security issue; that's how you defend this buffoonery?  If it was just a security issue, why not just disable the Touch ID functionality instead of the entire phone?!  Get ready for another expensive lawsuit.  
    Just amazes me how people can feel no embarrassment in displaying such stupidity in public.
    ai46ericthehalfbeeawilliams87pscooter63
Sign In or Register to comment.