Users Facing 'Error 53' Bricking Message After Third-Party iPhone 6 Home Button Repairs

[brilliantthings]

I was reading that article thinking how evil it is. But the company's explanation is interesting. A huge part of the promotion is the security of touch id. In some ways it makes no sense to offer a potentially low security replacement Touch ID the same functionality.

The decent way to do that though would be to disable touch id entirely if replaced third party, but not the home button or the whole phone. That's entirely unnecessary.
[doublepost=1454700465][/doublepost]

Instead of bricking the damn phone, 'Error 53' should simply disable TouchID. Problem solved

Beat me to it

 

[numlock]

Yes, you are able to. And accept the consequences.

so you are one of those that think having a bricked phone constitutes a choice?

If they can detect it they can disable access to secure enclave, and touch id and still allow users to revert to password/pin.

considering touch id isnt mandatory i would have to agree with you that apple seems to be reaching here.

 

[IGI2]

No need to disable the entire phone over this though. Find an unauthorized touch-id sensor is present, disable touch-id, and make it work just a button like it was in the iPhone 5. Disabling the entire device and all functionality is taking it way too far.

So you want Apple to do some software quirks in case someone will replace some hardware part with some fake one? And if someone installs some fake 2mpx camera sensor, the Camera.app should just alert that you will now have the possibility to make smaller photos due to the fake camera sensor?

Right now it's just a simple security check:
- Touch ID has been played with if TRUE then LOCK THE DEVICE.

It's being locked because it is a dangerous situation, maybe you don't have your phone with you and some thief will try other options to unlock your device.

 

[Tjex]

Exactly. From Honda. Like what should have been done in the first place for such a component.

No, not exactly, Honda doesn't brick your car. I can still use the car with a new fob. You have to buy a whole new iPhone after this.

 

[sososowhat]

My 6 Plus went Error 53 in January as I tried to upgrade to IOS 9.2.1 from, I guess, 9.2.0. The upgrade failed, then it said I needed to do a factory reset which I did, but that resulted in Error 53.

I had never done any work on the phone - no touch ID (or any other) repairs.

At the Apple Store I said "error 53" and they said "ok, let's verify that". They got the same result & said "you need a new phone". Since I didn't have AppleCare, they sold me a new phone for $329.

View attachment 614417

Am I the only one who's gotten Error 53 without ever doing anything to their phone? No repairs, no jailbreak, no nothing. Just an upgrade to 9.2.1.

 

[Mascots]

No, not exactly, Honda doesn't brick your car. I can still use the car with a new fob. You have to buy a whole new iPhone after this.

Has it been said that you can't take it in to an authorized iPhone repair to have it swapped correctly and with authorized components? If someone manages to break in and take your Honda, are they able to have access to all of your information?

 

[Tjex]

Good idea, be mad at the phone manufacturer and not the person who was improperly trained to work on a phone.[/QUOTED]

Did you not read the article? It was working until the new OS update! No warning given!

 

[Thunderhawks]

I don't give a crap about how Apple think about security. It is my phone and if the home button gives, I will choose who fix my phone. I ain't let Apple rip me off by charging 100 or more for a crappy home button.

Second, there is no reason to assume that third party will put hacked home button to my phone. And I don't need Apple to baby my security. There is no reason for brick the entire freaking phone just because I replaced the crappy home button. Fine, if you think TouchID is important for security issue, then just disable the stupid TouchID and Apple Pay. As least let user do most basic things.


If Apple can brick my phone by software updates because I replaced the home button by myself. Apple can brick my phone if I change the battery by myself. If I changed the screen by myself. Apple can have 1000 reasons to do that and Apple has the incentive to do so.

I am avoid get into Apple's ecosystem too deeply and I ain't paying any apps if I do not need, just because I ain't going to lock myself into Apple's ecosystem and play along with Apple's rule.



You don't have home button broken on you does not mean it won't happen. I had iPhone 4S and iPad 3 home button fails. It is physical button, it will break sometime. When it happens, Apple will charge you crap load of money.

I ain't paying Apple for that. This is why I am using Android, if something break, I will fix myself or let someone else fix. Not paying Apple single dime.

Please read again, I posted: "Don't say it does not happen"

But , I can tell from your raging responses that your (politely put) thinking is just different.
Must be the ANDROID waves.

I missed where you mentioned why your are on MR.

 

[oneMadRssn]

So you want Apple to do some software quirks in case someone will replace some hardware part with some fake one? And if someone installs some fake 2mpx camera sensor, the Camera.app should just alert that you will now have the possibility to make smaller photos due to the fake camera sensor?

Right now it's just a simple security check:
- Touch ID has been played with if TRUE then LOCK THE DEVICE.

It's being locked because it is a dangerous situation, maybe you don't have your phone with you and some thief will try other options to unlock your device.

The software quirk is what they are doing now. iPhones that worked with iOS8 no longer work with iOS9 with no warning or notice - nothing in the release notes or TOS warned of this. Rather than introduce a heavy-handed approach, Apple could have just isolated the offending feature. I know there are many low income people that rely on donated iPhones as their sole means of accessing the internet, phone, or accessing 911. These are also the people that would probably go to a third-party repair shop if something breaks. If Apple wants to be so heavy-handed with this, they should provide free touch-ID replacements to all affected users.

Remember when Microsoft first introduced Activation, and told people that new copies of Windows would stop working after 2 months unless activated within that time frame? People on this forum and nearly everywhere else were screaming unfair, what if I'm in the Sahara desert for 3 months? How dare Microsoft disable all use of my laptop if I'm in the Amazon rain-forrest without a way of activating? This is the same thing - how dare Apple disable a perfectly good working phone just because someone isn't near from an authorized repair shop or is unable to purchase a new phone?

 

[sanjuro21]

Some iPhone 6 users who had their smartphones repaired by third-party technicians are reporting that a mysterious "error 53" message is permanently bricking their iPhones (via The Guardian). Users who have had Touch ID on their iPhone 6 fixed by a non-Apple technician, and agreed to update the iPhone to the most recent version of iOS, are facing an issue which essentially prevents all access to the iPhone.

Freelance photographer Antonio Olmos is one such affected iPhone 6 user who had his iPhone repaired in Macedonia while working. He said "it worked perfectly" after the repair shop finished fixing the broken screen and home button, but once he updated to iOS 9 he got an "error 53" message and could no longer access any of his personal content on the iPhone. An Apple Store in London was shown the issue, and staff there admitted there was nothing they could do for him besides sell him a new iPhone.

Speaking with The Guardian, iFixit's Kyle Wiens said that the issue, while still unclear, appears to be Apple ensuring only genuine components are being used for repairs. Once a third party changes the home button or internal cable, the iPhone checks to be sure that all original components are running the phone, and if there are any discrepancies users face the "error 53" message and can't access their data. Since mentions of "error 53" span a few versions of iOS, it's unclear specifically which software update began the phone-locking error message.

An Apple spokeswoman commented on the issue, referring to protective security features intended to prevent "malicious" third-party components from potentially compromising a user's iPhone as the main reason for the "error 53" message. Other than that, Apple hasn't commented on the issue or outlined exactly what the company can do for those affected by the iPhone bricking error message. Mentions of "error 53" have been around since at least last April, where some users have encountered the issue in software updates as early as iOS 8.3.

Article Link: Users Facing 'Error 53' Bricking Message After Third-Party iPhone 6 Home Button Repairs

My kid broke his iPhone 6 and lost his home button. I had a shop fix it and it worked fine (minus Touch ID) until he did an update. I had a long chat session with Apple Care people on this subject. They told me the following:
1) Shouldn't ever have a non-authorized shop fix your phone.
2) Apple refuses to look/fix the phone after it's be opened by anyone.
3) Sprint and another "Apple Authorized Dealer", both recommended by Apple and both flat out refused to deal with the phone.
4) After I told this to Apple, they said they could fix it, after I complained and escalated the issue, but the cost to fix would be more than buying a new phone.

Cost for repairs: $120
Cost for new iPhone 6: $549
Cost for being a Apple fanboy: priceless.

Thank You Apple.

 

[Mascots]

Second, there is no reason to assume that third party will put hacked home button to my phone. And I don't need Apple to baby my security

Because approaching security with any lax has always worked out for companies - we can trust everyone and just get along, right? Ensuring the hardware is authorized that grants access to the most massive wealth of personal information collected together about a single person is not babying. It's taking the utmost care, which has trade offs.
Sony, Anthem, US Government, Ashley Madison, Experian, Target - many of them allowed lax and as more do, the list grows. You can't afford to not be proactive about subjects like this, whether it affects a set predisposed of individuals and/or has the potential to affect an entire segment of your customer base.

 

[Tjex]

Has it been said that you can't take it in to an authorized iPhone repair to have it swapped correctly and with authorized components? If someone manages to break in and take your Honda, are they able to have access to all of your information?

If you read the article, there is nothing some can do once it's briked. Your only option is a new phone. I fail to see why they can't just disable touch id. Apple is greedy!

 

[Norbs12]

Yes I did. There is a reason people get certified to do things. I can fix your car with duct tape but that doesn't mean I fixed it correctly or that it will last.

 

[Shasterball]

Apple has zero responsibility to allow or consider non- Apple parts being put into their product.

This broad statement is patently false.

 

[Gudi]

Then it's up to Apple to make those official parts more readily available.

https://locate.apple.com/mk/en/

Bricking them out of their phones because they are too far away from a store AND forcing them to use 3rd-party parts because Apple thumbs their nose at anyone who isn't in their repair "clique" is a jerk move.

You can go to an Apple Authorized Service Provider or to an Unauthorized Service Provider, it's your choice. But don't blame Apple if you choose the latter and it doesn't work properly.

 

[Mascots]

If you read the article, there is nothing some can do once it's briked. Your only option is a new phone. I fail to see why they can't just disable touch id. Apple is greedy!

Are you referring to this:

An Apple Store in London was shown the issue, and staff there admitted there was nothing they could do for him besides sell him a new iPhone.

Because that isn't an answer. Apple will refuse to touch a phone that has been modified by someone who shouldn't and that's to prevent themselves from going negative on a mess created by someone else. If you tried to cheap out, then got screwed, that is on you. You should be going to the person who repaired your phone as they should stand by their repairs. Apple has no obligation to stand by repairs it can't confirm are legitimate.

Because you "fail to see why they can't just disable touch id" hardly translates into "Apple is greedy!".

IMO, I'd rather the access to my data lock when someone attempts to extract it with physical access than having the ability to cheap out by going to an unauthorized dealer.

 

[69Mustang]

So you want Apple to do some software quirks in case someone will replace some hardware part with some fake one? And if someone installs some fake 2mpx camera sensor, the Camera.app should just alert that you will now have the possibility to make smaller photos due to the fake camera sensor?

Right now it's just a simple security check:
- Touch ID has been played with if TRUE then LOCK THE DEVICE.

It's being locked because it is a dangerous situation, maybe you don't have your phone with you and some thief will try other options to unlock your device.

That analogy fails on many levels, the least of which is it's relevance to the topic. I don't think you read the entire article or you didn't understand it. When the guy got his phone fixed with unauthorized parts, the phone worked. Just like it used to work. So in his instance, what you claim as a security feature, it didn't do what you described: if true, lock the device. Where's the security? Unauthorized parts installed. Phone works fine.

Error-53 kicked in when he responded to the request to update his phone. If he hadn't updated, he could still possibly have a working phone, with unauthorized parts. I understand the security rationale behind Apple's explanation. I agree with the rationale as well. It just didn't work until the guy updated. If that update is required before the security kicks in, that's not exactly security in the purest sense.

 

[applezulu]

Voids warranty, yes. That's pretty standard. Brick your phone with no warning, no, not industry standard.

Let's sum this up.

1. iPhone user takes phone to shadetree workshop, gets TouchID button replaced with aftermarket parts, voids warranty and current user agreement, and now owns what amounts to an insecure, hacked device.

2. User then connects said hacked, voided hardware to Apple and requests free software upgrade (for improved utility and security updates!), clicks 'I Agree' on user agreement that the hacked, voided hardware (by definition) violates.

3. New software detects hacked, voided hardware, and shuts it down.

4. User is then upset that Apple did not accommodate the violation of user agreement by writing code that provides a workaround to enable hacked, voided hardware to still function in a security-breached mode.

5. Some people on MacRumors forum appreciate that Apple takes data security seriously.

6. Other people on MacRumors forum feel that Apple should soften security protocols in order to accommodate users who knowingly or foolishly have their hardware hacked, and that by not doing so, Apple is evil and greedy.

 

[69Mustang]

https://locate.apple.com/mk/en/
You can go to an Apple Authorized Service Provider or to an Unauthorized Service Provider, it's your choice. But don't blame Apple if you choose the latter and it doesn't work.

But the phone did work. I think that's the guys whole issue.
[doublepost=1454702229][/doublepost]

Let's sum this up.

1. iPhone user takes phone to shadetree workshop, gets TouchID button replaced with aftermarket parts, voids warranty and current user agreement, and now owns what amounts to an insecure, hacked device.

2. User then connects said hacked, voided hardware to Apple and requests free software upgrade (for improved utility and security updates!), clicks 'I Agree' on user agreement that the hacked, voided hardware (by definition) violates.

3. New software detects hacked, voided hardware, and shuts it down.

4. User is then upset that Apple did not accommodate the violation of user agreement by writing code that provides a workaround to enable hacked, voided hardware to still function in a security-breached mode.

5. Some people on MacRumors forum appreciate that Apple takes data security seriously.

6. Other people on MacRumors forum feel that Apple should soften security protocols in order to accommodate users who knowingly or foolishly have their hardware hacked, and that by not doing so, Apple is evil and greedy.

Holy crap. Nothing in your quote is true. You made up everything about the issue. You didn't even try to use the facts presented in the article.

 

[Tubamajuba]

Steve is dead. Haven't you heard?

For him to be dead now, he must have been alive at some point in the past. When he was alive, he held the same attitude towards third party repairs as Cook does now. Why criticize Cook for something and not Jobs? I don't understand why we can't admit that Cook isn't the worst human being on the planet and that maybe Jobs wasn't God.

 

[ElRojito]

Why?

If my iPhone is out of warranty, then I should be able to have it repaired by who ever I want.

I can see why it might be a good thing to avoid circumventing the security on stolen phones, but from a user standpoint who wants a repair, apple repairs aren't exactly the cheapest, or in the UK and other countries where apple stores are only in big cities, its a pain in the rear not being able to take it to a local phone shop.

You're kidding. Apple display replacements are some of the cheapest.

Also, you're more than welcome to do the repair yourself. No one is stopping you. Just don't expect it to work 100%

 

[Mascots]

If that update is required before the security kicks in, that's not exactly security in the purest sense.

Maybe they discovered another avenue for identifying unauthorized components that have been trying to pass themselves off as authorized? Had they and not responded would be like saying there was a bug found in Safari 9.0 after release but not to patch it in 9.1 because it's already exposed in the wild.

 

[Jeans01Ddk]

Can anybody tell me how Apple can get away with this scam? I mean... I buy an iPhone 6s in Denmark for 7000 kr (1000$) and believe it's my private property now? Then I modify it, and along comes Apple and bricks it! Okay, now Apple has to pay for a new iPhone... or at least I expect them to, because if I bump into a person on the street and she looses her iPhone 6s, I will have to pay a new one to her, wether she's modified it or not! How come you Americans do not sue Apple for 100's og billions, when they delibritly put scam software on your iPhones, but gladly sue VW for 100 billions for scam software in their cars? Doesn't make sense... If Apple bricks my phone they MUST pay... and I don't care if they say it's all about security... It's MY phone and they bricked it!
Can anybody here show where Apple has claimed that it's not legal to change the Home-button yourself, and if you do, Apple has the legal right to posses your private property, and brick your brand new iPhone at will? Then I will disgres...

 

[citysnaps]

If you read the article, there is nothing some can do once it's briked. Your only option is a new phone. I fail to see why they can't just disable touch id. Apple is greedy!

Perhaps that's because you rely on information and draw conclusions from a rumors site, and are not privy to Apple's design and security methodologies and protocols, which are likely well-guarded and not available publicly?

"Apple is greedy!"

Please... It works much better saying that with squinted eyes and a little sneer, while slowly shaking your head so everyone will know you're someone who insists on being taken seriously.

 

[applezulu]

But the phone did work. I think that's the guys whole issue.
[doublepost=1454702229][/doublepost]
Holy crap. Nothing in your quote is true. You made up everything about the issue. You didn't even try to use the facts presented in the article.

Well, that's probably Apple's one mistake in all of this. The phone probably should have been bricked the moment the TouchID 'enclave' was breached.