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

[cdmoore74]

Inconvenient, but makes sense. You're dealing with an advanced security feature, not just a simple clicky button.

Got to agree but Apple should warn folks first. Give people a chance to correct the issue. People do use their iPhones for business and vacation.

 

[Tjex]

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.

Fine, I'll squint my eyes and say it again. They are greedy. They keep adding new things to control who can repair a phone I paid for. I own it, I don't rent it.

I expect the EU to challenge this and force apple to pay back the owners of phones they bricked.

 

[Mascots]

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.

I'm just going to reiterate the point I had above - how do you know that these unauthorized components weren't falsely passing themselves off as authorized to the phone prior to the update? I wouldn't put it past any manufacture, especially in the Chinese market, in attempting to game the system to make themselves look legitimate when they in fact are not to save the pennies.

Without more information, we really have no way of knowing anything other than Apple is making more steps to protect user information that is actively at risk.

 

[bluespark]

Assuming Apple's stated rationale is sincere, the solution should be to disable Touch-ID, not to brick the entire device.

 

[AxoNeuron]

Speaking as a software engineer, I believe the opposite. Our professions can only lend us so much insight.

IMO, attempting to allow access to the phone while disabling only Touch ID would create a not-so-fun a cat and mouse game where the loser is no one other than the consumer, who would actively be losing data to exploiters leaving Apple attempting to patch around an issue thats broader than it has to be.

Bricking the phone at a low level in this manner prevents the exploiter from guess-and-try tactics to use a modified Touch ID sensor on an individual phone to slide between the layers of hardware to software encryption mechanisms which are heavily intertwined in this process. I understand their reasoning to attempt to lock the data in cases which hardware has been modified in an unauthorized way since they have no clue if it was a repair or an attempt to actually steal data with physical access.

Apple forces you to enter your pass code when you first turn on a device. They can selectively prevent access to the secure enclave in certain situations, and this situation should be one of them. But instead they chose to completely brick the phone.

The fact that they chose to brick the phone entirely was unreasonable and unecessary, and damages the brand in the minds of a lot of people.

 

[applezulu]

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.

Please enlighten me. What did I write that wasn't true? I'll admit to being a little sarcastic in tone, but I fail to see where the facts as presented significantly diverge.

 

[LovingTeddy]

That only would only show how little Android care about your security.

LOL...this has nothing to do with security.. It is everything about getting more money and monopolize iPhone repair... Sooner or later you will have to pay Apple big bucks for verything...

Apple is just using security as excuse for doing that, just like Bush use WMD as excuse to attack Iraq

 

[Mascots]

Apple forces you to enter your pass code when you first turn on a device. They can selectively prevent access to the secure enclave in certain situations, and this situation should be one of them. But instead they chose to completely brick the phone.

The fact that they chose to brick the phone entirely was unreasonable and unecessary, and damages the brand in the minds of a lot of people.

I 100% disagree. How do you know without a doubt that an unauthorized modified version of Touch ID can't access the SE? How do you know without a doubt that one won't ever exist?

You don't.

How does any iPhone know that the unauthorized TouchID sensor was placed in an attempt to fix the button and not in access the glorious information stored within?

It doesn't.

How can you say there is no chance that the selective access to the SE is regulated via communication via the SE and TouchID

You can't.

In a situation like this, it's better to broadly secure as much as possible and I, as a user, prefer this to selectively exposing.

 

[nebo1ss]

Here comes the Class action lawsuits. They will be lining up.

 

[69Mustang]

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.

How am I to answer that? You just speculated something that ignores the evidence at hand. Any answer I provide is only more speculation on top of speculation. It get's us no closer to addressing the topic of bricked because of security.

 

[AxoNeuron]

I 100% disagree. How do you know without a doubt that an unauthorized modified version of Touch ID can't access the SE? How do you know without a doubt that one won't ever exist?

You don't.

I dont, but the problem is, Apple is going about it entirely the wrong way EITHER way.

This problem exists anyways. The secure enclave is, by nature, secure. They use cryptographic hashing and all that. I have seen zero evidence to support the idea that Apple was somehow forced into doing this. Given this lack of evidence, it is totally natural to assume that Apple should and could have chosen to simply deactivate and erase the Touch ID secure enclave in these cases, but they chose to disable the entire phone instead.

If there is a vulnerability in touch ID, they should issue a software update to fix the vulnerability, not just brick the entire damn device.

If the secure enclave isn't entirely secure and fake components can somehow get access to it, Apple should be offering these people free replacements for their damaged home buttons instead of just screwing them entirely.

So in either case, Apple really is at fault here.

 

[69Mustang]

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.

On that we can definitely agree. In fact, I said the exact same thing here:
"Either there's info missing from MR's article, or the explanation doesn't entirely hold water. Partially, yes. Completely, no. If it just about the security, then Touch ID shouldn't work after the repair. Again, according to the article, that's not the case. Touch ID does work using the replacement home buttons. The error-53 message only appears after an update to the latest version of iOS. If that is indeed the case, the security isn't secure and it sort of nullifies the reasoning of avoiding security compromises.

In my mind, if it's about security, the replacement home button would cease to work immediately. That's security. Requiring an update to trigger the Error-53 really isn't. Fairly, there's most likely a lot I'm missing, but if the article is correct, Error-53 doesn't prevent installing unapproved Touch ID sensors; hacked or otherwise."

 

[gotluck]

I 100% disagree. How do you know without a doubt that an unauthorized modified version of Touch ID can't access the SE? How do you know without a doubt that one won't ever exist?

You don't.

How does any iPhone know that the unauthorized TouchID sensor was placed in an attempt to fix the button and not in access the glorious information stored within?

It doesn't.

How can you say there is no chance that the selective access to the SE is regulated via communication via the SE and TouchID

You can't.

In a situation like this, it's better to broadly secure as much as possible and I, as a user, prefer this to selectively exposing.

The secure enclave really isnt very secure then if it isnt able to detect an unathorized touchid sensor feeding it fingerprint data

 

[citysnaps]

Fine, I'll squint my eyes and say it again. They are greedy. They keep adding new things to control who can repair a phone I paid for. I own it, I don't rent it.

I expect the EU to challenge this and force apple to pay back the owners of phones they bricked.

I'm going to die laughing if you really believe that. A real knee-slapper.

 

[Ubuntu]

When I saw the title I thought "Damn, that's crazy!"

When I realised it was to do with Touch ID I realised "Actually, that makes perfect sense."

 

[Swift]

While I understand the vitriol against Apple for this error, it makes sense from a security standpoint. Hopefully, having an authorized Apple repair center replace the home button with a legitimate one can restore a phone giving this error.

Security comes at a cost. If he was under warranty, the repair would be free at Apple. Now, the only alternative is to publish the specs for re-initializing the secure enclave. But then every evil bastard in the world could make a malevolent home button, couldn't they? The third party repairman didn't know how to do the job. Sure, they'll put in a new screen if you break it, all kinds of repairs. Maybe if he explained his mistake, why it was hard to get a repair at an Apple Store in Macedonia, the Genius could give him a used phone. I've actually gotten that courtesy once.

 

[Mascots]

How am I to answer that? You just speculated something that ignores the evidence at hand. Any answer I provide is only more speculation on top of speculation. It get's us no closer to addressing the topic of bricked because of security.

It's speculation that Apple chose to ignore disabling phones for unauthorized TouchID sensors prior to update.

The majority of the justification for complaints here are based on just that, speculation.

 

[CEmajr]

This has been known for quite a while now. I sold an iPhone 6 to someone last year with a repaired home button and got this error.

 

[citysnaps]

It's speculation that Apple chose to ignore disabling phones for unauthorized TouchID sensors prior to update.

The majority of the justification for complaints here are based on just that, speculation.

Yup... Hilarious watching a lot of people getting frothed up on something relating to Apple's internal security procedures and protocols, of which they have zero knowledge. Other than incomplete information and speculation from a rumors site.

Amazing Apple has that much power over others' lives, causing them to behave that way.

 

[Mascots]

Given this lack of evidence, it is totally natural to assume that Apple should and could have chosen to simply deactivate and erase the Touch ID secure enclave in these cases, but they chose to disable the entire phone instead.

Given the lack of evidence, I find it more plausible that Apple choose the route to ensure the most protection across the widest audience that can be affected. In that case, in my opinion of course, it means preventing all access to data in an effort to stutter any data-limiting hacks or bugs possible.

 

[steve62388]

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.

The problem being is that if you get your way it immediately compromises the security of everybody else's phone, under warranty or not.

 

[Tsuchiya]

Previously 3rd party repairs would at worst, invalidate your warranty and give Apple grounds to refuse service. To completely brick a users device is harsh. There are various reasons to seek a repair elsewhere, and some people simply don't know better.

I also feel for the poor bastards working in the retail stores who will have to deal with the fallout for this.

 

[KPOM]

So, putting my iPhones home button on another iPhone could be a hardware hack to entry the secured pre iOS9 data? Just asking...

If it were to be able to access the "secure enclave," then yes. It's like being able to use your car key on another car of the same model.

 

[69Mustang]

It's speculation that Apple chose to ignore disabling phones for unauthorized TouchID sensors prior to update.

The majority of the justification for complaints here are based on just that, speculation.

My quotes weren't about any of that speculation. I'd be hard pressed to lend any relevant commentary without traipsing down that rabbit hole with the majority you referenced.

 

[trainwrecka]

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.

So your solution is for Apple to compromise on security, so some users can save money and others don't have to drive as far? Sounds like you need an Android phone.