Apple slapped with class action suit over Touch ID-related 'Error 53' code

124»

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 72
    mazda 3smazda 3s Posts: 1,613member
    freerange said:

    If Apple expects to sell automobiles which have similar "security" features, so that only authorized repair shops can do engine work, reset computers and sensors, maybe even top off the wiper fluid.... they won't be selling any such cars to me.  #GetMeThatSamsungCar
    Bad analogy. This is about repairing or replacing security features on your iPhone. This is no different than if you need to replace the electronic ignition keys for your BMW, Mercedes, Audi etc. These are programmed security devices and can only be obtained through the manufacturer or authorized auto dealers, and even then the dealer needs to send away for them from a special unit that is solely responsible for programming and verifying them based on vehicle ID.
    Equally bad analogy. If your ignition is fubared, you don't have to buy a whole brand new car (as is the case with Error 53)
    teaearlegreyhot
  • Reply 62 of 72
    idreyidrey Posts: 647member
    I don't know I kind of agree that it might be a bit to much to brick the phone but what if somebody could figure out how to fool the software and be able to switch Touch ID and be able to use it on stolen iPhones . I guess is better safe than sorry. 
  • Reply 63 of 72
    tenlytenly Posts: 710member
    focher said:
    So much ignorance of both warranty laws let alone the underlying problem itself. First, no manufacturer can just force a purchaser to waive their rights by creating a shrink-wrap agreement containing non-enforceable terms. Second, no manufacturer is nor should be allowed to artificially break a product because they are able to detect a non-manufacturer repair has been performed on the device.

    Forget the iPhone and just consider this in the context of your car. If you took your car to the dealer and they detected a non-dealer repair, are they allowed to make the car non-operable? What if you signed an agreement when you bought your car that forced you to only receive repairs from an authorized dealer? That's totally unenforceable (and actually illegal). The manufacturer has to show that the non-authorized repair actually caused the problem.

    Now we come to the Error 53 problem. There's a simple set of options Apple could have offered. First, the best one is to just force a reset of the TouchID security enclave. Empty it out, and if the user has the passcode (which is the real basis of the device encryption), then the user can setup TouchID again. Alternatively just force a total reset of the full device with a data wipe / erase. No security violation in either case.

    And by the way, Error 53 definitely can happen even when Apple itself repairs an iPhone as I had that very thing happen. Artificially bricking a phone during a restore or update process is just plain not necessary and definitely does not meet a fair principle of "do no harm". The question is why Apple feels compelled to brick a phone in the situation as opposed to simply refusing to run the update process.
    What makes you think that Apple is bricking the phones INTENTIONALLY?  Their own statement says that "When iOS detects that the pairing fails, Touch ID, including Apple Pay, is disabled so the device remains secure."

    That doesn't say that they are bricking the phones - in fact - it says the opposite.

    Everything else is rumor and conjecture.  I don't disbelieve that some users are finding their phones have been bricked - but I don't believe that Apple bricked the device intentionally because the user got an unauthorized repair.  It's far more likely that the bricking is accidental - due to a software bug.  That would still make it Apples fault - but not through some evil, illegal policy to punish users for getting a 3rd party repair - and therefore, no class action lawsuit!  Software defects are part of life no matter how well a product is tested - and if this particular big is only triggered when a 3rd party repair shop does things in a different or incorrect manner - that is different from the way Apple would handle the repair - it's really not a scenario Apple can test fully.

    So - we should all completely ignore the rants about Apples "illegal policy" until Apple makes it clear that it is in fact their policy.  All I have seen from Apple is that they intend to disable Touch ID when they discover an incomplete Touch ID repair has been performed.  People are getting themselves worked up over FUD that is being widely spread by the media and Apple haters all over the world.

    This class action lawsuit is a joke that will go nowhere.  Also - 5 million dollars seems really low for a class action suit.  That alone speaks volumes as to the size of the class (number of affected users).

    So, RELAX everybody and take a breath!  Apple will fix the software bug if that's what it is - and the phones will be made usable with a passcode.  Touch ID will likely be left disabled if it was replaced by an unauthorized 3rd party that isn't able to initialize it properly - or as recompense for the inconvenience of the glitch - Apple may go ahead and replace the Touch ID sensor for affected users too

    If anybody wants to dispute this - please include a link to an official statement from Apple that says they are INTENTIONALLY bricking the phones.  "Disabling Touch ID" does not equal a bricked phone.  It just means you must enter your password/passcode 
  • Reply 64 of 72
    foggyhill said:
    tele1234 said:

    You're missing the point. It's apple's decision to disable a component of a device in the name of security. it doesn't matter that it's for security, it doesn't matter that it's in the best interest of the consumer - it's giving up liberty. Does that mean nothing?

    Apple should offer a choice - one that says that a modification has been discovered in the hardware that could potentially lead to identity fraud, device theft, snooping or whatever and it's strongly, strongly suggested that the component be turned off and the device taken to an apple store for checking. That would be a perfect solution - giving the consumer a say in the deactivation of a component of a device they purchased, taking the risks into their own hands of actually saying yea, that's a good idea and getting it checked.

    When Sony disabled Linux installation functionality on the PS3, it was a lawsuit big enough to cause Sony to have to refund PS3 purchases. Sony purposely disabled a component of the PS3 which some people purchased it for, and it was done for nothing but "security" as Sony claimed it was breached by hackers. Was that acceptable?Microsoft has filled Windows 10 with adware and spyware that snoops on the user and dials home information, and forces updates on the consumer for security reasons. Is that acceptable?

    These are similar situations, and frankly it's downright unacceptable to see a company as large as Apple take such an authoritarian approach to a consumer's best interests.

    They have a fracking say, don't go to POS repairement that knew they would brick your phone for one year (IOS 8.3) and didn't tell you.
    You don know that those turds knew about this. This has been going on for quite some time.
    That's it : every else is just posturing bull shit.
    Again, the reports I have read DO NOT claim that the phone is bricked by the repair. That only happens when the owner of the phone tries to update the system software (e.g. from iOS8 to iOS9). If that is not the case it would be nice if someone would clarify. As things stand currently this seems like a homeowner wants to do an improvement, the original contractor shows up and notices something is unexpected about the back door. He immediately proceeds to burn down the house. It is the burning down the house (i.e. bricking the phone) that is objectionable.
  • Reply 65 of 72
    Glad to see there is a class action suit in progress...

    https://thatitdude.wordpress.com/2016/01/31/error-53-iphone-what-do-i-do-now/

    Had this happen to my iPhone..Apparently shop replaced the button when they replaced my broken screen.
  • Reply 66 of 72
    tenlytenly Posts: 710member
    sdbryan said:
    foggyhill said:

    They have a fracking say, don't go to POS repairement that knew they would brick your phone for one year (IOS 8.3) and didn't tell you.
    You don know that those turds knew about this. This has been going on for quite some time.
    That's it : every else is just posturing bull shit.
    Again, the reports I have read DO NOT claim that the phone is bricked by the repair. That only happens when the owner of the phone tries to update the system software (e.g. from iOS8 to iOS9). If that is not the case it would be nice if someone would clarify. As things stand currently this seems like a homeowner wants to do an improvement, the original contractor shows up and notices something is unexpected about the back door. He immediately proceeds to burn down the house. It is the burning down the house (i.e. bricking the phone) that is objectionable.
    I read that also - and to me, that's more evidence that some piece of code is malfunctioning...

    ...OR that the OS upgrade itself fails and is unable to complete and boot properly because it can't initiate/re-intiate the secure connection between the Tocuh ID sensor and the Secure Element.  (In which case this would be an unintentional side effect caused by the 3rd party repair as opposed
    to Apple punishing people who had 3rd
    party repairs performed).  In this case, the same error 53 could potentially occur for a number of reasons -  not just Touch ID problems.

    On the surface that seems like a reasonable approach.  A problem is detected between 2 important components (Touch ID sensor and secure enclave) during OS install.  That should trigger an error.  It appears that the error handling code is not set up to recognize that there are valid(?) reasons why those 2 components might not be able to communicate - and the OS upgrade code treats it as a fatal error instead of just ignoring it and continuing the install.

    I didn't see it in the report, but if what Apple states is true - Touch ID would have stopped working immediately after the repair is performed.
    edited February 2016
  • Reply 67 of 72
    Rayz2016 said:
    If Apple expects to sell automobiles which have similar "security" features, so that only authorized repair shops can do engine work, reset computers and sensors, maybe even top off the wiper fluid.... they won't be selling any such cars to me.  #GetMeThatSamsungCar

    So let me make sure I understand what you're saying…

    You think it would be okay to take a car with a sophisticated electric engine, computer-controlled navigation and cruise control (possibly self-driving) to Honest Bob's Backyard Repair Shop?

    So I assume then that you would be happy enough to fly on a plane that had been serviced by someone who wasn't authorised to work on it, but had skimmed the Haynes Manual.
    Don't extend my comment to airplanes or spacecraft.  I'm talking about automobiles, which work just fine right now except that drivers can't text and play whilst driving. Yes, if Apple makes a car that nobody but Apple can fix, then count me out.
  • Reply 68 of 72
    sflocal said:
    If Apple expects to sell automobiles which have similar "security" features, so that only authorized repair shops can do engine work, reset computers and sensors, maybe even top off the wiper fluid.... they won't be selling any such cars to me.  #GetMeThatSamsungCar
    Please.  Cry me a river.  

    Doing "engine work", replacing tires, topping off wiper fluid is completely different than replacing a key component responsible for security/encryption of said device with an unauthorized part.

    Care to try for story-spin version 2.0??
    Apple can make what they want, of course. But I draw the limit at my iPhone, for buying products that only the manufacturer can fix. And really, Apple SHOULD let us replace the batteries in our iPhones. So it's not a great extension for them to make a car that only they can replace the tires or wiper blades on.  And if they do, I'm not going to buy it.  Period.
  • Reply 69 of 72
    Cant believe how blind some people on here seem to be. Do you not understand how wrong Apple are here. It is totally wrong for them to make a device totally useless because you don't use their repair service or original parts. I can agree that the use of the Touch ID should be disabled if unofficially tampered with. Can you imagine the uproar there would be if you lost your iPhone and used the iCloud to erase my data only to find your iPhone under the bed, then when you go to use it again, it was bricked. Using iCloud to erase your data is for security reasons, so why don't Apple brick these phones. 


    I think Apple will be found wanting in this case and rightly so. Let me use whatever/whoever I want to repair my phone. And to the silly people who will say "buy and android" get a life. 


  • Reply 70 of 72
    tenlytenly Posts: 710member
    crapday said:
    Cant believe how blind some people on here seem to be. Do you not understand how wrong Apple are here. It is totally wrong for them to make a device totally useless because you don't use their repair service or original parts. I can agree that the use of the Touch ID should be disabled if unofficially tampered with. Can you imagine the uproar there would be if you lost your iPhone and used the iCloud to erase my data only to find your iPhone under the bed, then when you go to use it again, it was bricked. Using iCloud to erase your data is for security reasons, so why don't Apple brick these phones. 


    I think Apple will be found wanting in this case and rightly so. Let me use whatever/whoever I want to repair my phone. And to the silly people who will say "buy and android" get a life. 


    You're far from blind - in fact you see so much that you see stuff that doesn't even exist!   Do you not understand how wrong YOU are?  Where is the Apple statement that says they will make a device totally useless because of a third party repair?  You have just publicly convicted of them of being "wrong" to enforce a policy that doesn't exist!!!  You have fallen victim to rumors and hate mongering.  Apples stated policy is to disable Touch ID - which you said was reasonable...  Some phones are being disabled but there's no proof that it is intentional, there's no proof that its because of the Touch ID repair and there's no proof that it's permanent.  There have been reports of users encountering error 53 even though their phone has never been repaired.  A couple of journalists have made some wild-ass claims and driven you and half of the internet into a frenzy.  It's amazing how many people are willing to believe the worst about Apple and how quick you are to convict them based on a couple of pieces of highly suspect, circumstantial, anecdotal evidence.  You've got a brain.  It's time to start using it.
  • Reply 71 of 72
    Obviously none of you have had their iPhones damaged and bricked because of a silly mistake of their own. There are TONS of these cases showing its not so common knowledge, and very common practice to at least try to attend to matters on your own. It IS a device they made, but don't all of you forget that people pay up to $1000 for it, making it THEIR property now including all the data within it. They are not paying hundreds of $'s to borrow access to a device. Apple has no right taking it away. If they do, give them back their money. It's that simple and no document, law or argument can refute that fact
    edited March 2016
  • Reply 72 of 72
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    Obviously none of you have had their iPhones damaged and bricked because of a silly mistake of their own.
    Ha! We take care of our possessions and make sure not to damage them!
    There are TONS of these cases showing its not so common knowledge, and very common practice to at least try to attend to matters on your own.
    Who other than me actually uses his devices naked? I don’t know of anyone except Jerry Seinfeld. Everyone has cases.
    It's that simple and no document, law or argument can refute that fact
    What’s simple is that all unauthorized entry looks the same to a system trying to protect that data of yours.
    edited March 2016
Sign In or Register to comment.