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

[Keirasplace]

This is just one more reason I will most probably not be buying an iPhone again. If you don't like Apple's practice, vote with your wallet.

So, you're going to buy a phone with **** security? OK, then.

 

[pat500000]

I am fine with protections and security. I am not fine with secrets. Tell the consumer that the replacement of the sensor will brick the phone.

exactly. I don't like secrets...they need to be upfront about it.

 

[Gudi]

But the phone did work. I think that's the guys whole issue.

No it didn't, it just seemed to work until it broke. Exactly like TrimEnabler was an unsupported hack that broke with every OS update. And when you enable the new trimforce command, you get a warning it's all at your own risk and you should have backups. Apple can't make guarantees for parts from third-party manufacturers.

I am fine with protections and security. I am not fine with secrets. Tell the consumer that the replacement of the sensor will brick the phone.

Apple can't know which third-party parts will work and which won't, that's why authorized service providers exist, which only use original Apple parts.

 

[Wowereit]

Apple did not brick the phone, the part installed by a non authorized repair shop did. You take a risk when you choose to go that route. And the repair shop should have made it clear. Apple gives you a way to get their products repaired, if you as a consumer choose not to use Apple or an Authorize dealer/repair shop then it is on you, same as any product.

That's just wrong.
Apple bricks the devices on purpose via software.

 

[sulpfiction]

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.

Apple's FP scanner is serious security.

This is Apple telling us not to venture out of their ecosystem. In this case, if you try it your phone will be bricked. Imagine if you had to use genuine GM parts to repair your car or else your care is bricked. This scares the **** out of me.

Cmon...How narrow minded can you be? This is your security man. Your identity, your credit, your security. I am thrilled to find this out. It shows me another way Apple is taking my security seriously.

 

[igorsky]

This is just one more reason I will most probably not be buying an iPhone again. If you don't like Apple's practice, vote with your wallet.

You are the perfect Android customer...they don't care about security, either.

 

[XanderCrews]

Are you guys actually listening to yourselves? You are literally justifying Apple's actions in that they should be allowed to DESTROY someone's phone if they get it repaired at a 3rd party repair shop and then upgrade to the latest OS.
What the wut???
That's really F'd up guys. I mean, people refer to us as mindless sheep for this very reason. Come on.

First off, I'm not buying this excuse from Apple in the first place. No way they would brick someone's phone for getting it repaired at a non-Apple Store repair shop. If they are doing this on purpose, this should be reason enough for people to walk away...no, run away from Apple because this is pretty much illegal. I wouldn't want to be on the **** end of that stick.
But this has to be something that that was brought to their attention as a bug and their solution was to turn it into a feature and say customers are SOL (typical). And you guys are buying into it hook line and sinker. Sheesh.

Second, if Apple did do this on purpose, all Apple had to do was maybe disable the phone if it detects parts that are not "Apple made", or give you periodic notifications that you can't disable, and then remove them once the correct parts are installed. They don't have to brick the damn thing and make someone buy a new phone because of it. But, with that said, that's still horribly shady and majorly douchey, but at least they aren't destroying your ***** phone.

It's absolutely no different than the SS coming into your home in 1940's Germany and burning it down because you didn't have an approved "official" photo of Da Fuhrer on display. Well, same concept anyway.

If I want to get MY iPhone 6 repaired at a 3rd party shop, I should be able to do so at MY OWN RISK, without worry of Apple's iron fist coming down and smashing my phone from the heavens (or from hell, pick your poison). Apple has no right to tell me where I have to get my phone fixed and what brand parts I have to put in it. They are within their rights to void the warranty if the phone is still under warranty, I get that, but they can't be bricking people's phones over it. That is insane!
If I live 500 miles away from an Apple Store or an authorized repair center (if those even exist), then what? I have to ship it off and wait weeks to get it back? Or I have to drive 500 miles to get it fixed? That's just stupid if I have a phone repair shop in my town.

That 1984 ad that Apple is sooooo proud of, in no way shape or form represents the Apple of today. Talk about role reversal. Wow.

I don't believe Apple for a second in this. Surely this is a bug that they are trying to turn into a feature. If not, then this is reason enough to run away from Apple and never come back. We'll see if anything comes of this.

 

[dnsp]

Just write on the end user agreement: "If you change the touch id with a non OEM part you are on your own in terms of security". Just don't brick my €1000 equipment, ok? Thank you.

 

[cfedu]

So, you're going to buy a phone with **** security? OK, then.

Already bought one that has **** security, just like all the previous iPhones and Apples PC's that I have owned. Are you telling me that you buy your computers based on if it has a fingerprint sensor?

 

[RedWing512]

For starters I have NEVER had the home button of any iPhone fail. 3G, 4S and now 6S Plus
Doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

I would NEVER think of having my Apple home button be repaired by anybody but Apple (genius bar or mail it in)

You are barking up the wrong tree with this assumption.

Apple is doing exactly what it should do here. Protecting the iPhones security feature.

And you are also wrong in assuming that Apple's doing this JUST for security purposes. Apple's entire business model is built around making a huge profit off of everything. Locking down the whole repair process is part of that.

Being able to wave the whole "Look how secure we are" flag is just nothing more than a hand-wave to convince people to pay more to Apple than they probably really should; it's simply icing on the cake for them.

 

[CFreymarc]

Well, at least we know they are serious about that fingerprint data.

The the iPhone 6 fingerprint scanning units in the buttons have a unique serial number. Apple has a very tight parts tracking system.

I bet with iOS 9, they check the serial number of the button scanner and if it was not in their build index, the OS bricked detecting a clone. I have done this in a few firmware designs where the contract manufacturer would build extra units of our design outside our order and sell them as knock-offs. Some had lower quality parts.

We ended up field upgrading the firmware to ID a specific range of microcontroller serial numbers that we purchased and took delivery. If the serial number was not on that list, the firmware did not function. We discovered a few overseas distribution houses selling knock-off of our design this way. It pulled in overseas distributors for authentic products under our IP umbrella and we switched contract manufacturers of this issue.

 

[69Mustang]

I responded directly to this:



Of which you speculate that Apple did choose to ignore unauthorized components until the update.

But I'm not trying to make an argument about semiotics, just that it's better to protect as much as possible when it comes to data and things happening outside of an applications design.

This was the quote in full: "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."

Simply put, you're wrong. You took a single line from my quote out of context, and built a narrative of Apple choosing to ignore unauthorized components. That's not what that meant, and my full quote reinforces that. Even out of context, that's not what that line meant.

 

[CFreymarc]

And you are also wrong in assuming that Apple's doing this JUST for security purposes. Apple's entire business model is built around making a huge profit off of everything. Locking down the whole repair process is part of that.

Being able to wave the whole "Look how secure we are" flag is just nothing more than a hand-wave to convince people to pay more to Apple than they probably really should; it's simply icing on the cake for them.

This is a growing trend and is even moving into auto repair. There are currently huge lawsuits of independent automotive repair chains against automotive manufactures for making the repair cycle proprietary and licensed. The courts are still sorting this out including fair use issues.

 

[kerrikins]

Someone over on Reddit had a great point about this: Apple is being stringent because they are under pressure from the government. If they start relaxing on this at all then it gives the impression that there are loopholes and the government will want them to use those. I'm still not 100% convinced that this explains them not allowing the phone to default back to the passcode, but it is somewhat understandable.

Personally, I think they should implement a consistent nag-pop that they need to use their passcode when they attempt to use Touch ID would suffice (though people would still be pissed about that).

 

[LovingTeddy]

Lucky you. MacRumors has reported deaths due to using third party iPhone chargers.

Well... i am using Motorola charger to charge my iPhone. Seriously, if you do not use dollar store charger, you will be fine.

I also use third party breaking pad and rotor for my car. I never bother to take my car to dealers after warranty.

 

[Joesg]

They can't separate the functions. would you want to use a phone where the phone can send your info to somebody else just because you used a cheap knock offs part

The TouchID can be disabled from the iPhone settings and the home button works just fine.

 

[oliversl]

Try calling Apple Support from the US. Just try

 

[LovingTeddy]

Apple's FP scanner is serious security.


Cmon...How narrow minded can you be? This is your security man. Your identity, your credit, your security. I am thrilled to find this out. It shows me another way Apple is taking my security seriously.

LOL.. don't be so narrow minded. It is about your life, your family. I am thrilled to find this out. It shows me another way GM/Ford/Toyota etc. are taking my lide seriously. Only fix your car at dealer or your car will be bricked.

 

[jamezr]

You understand the security risks though? If someone could just install hacked touch ID sensors, then your data could be compromised. Apple has a responsibility to prevent scenarios like that.

And you don't have to get it fixed by Apple per se, but they probably need to be an authorized repair center. Otherwise what's to stop cheap repair shops from putting in Chinese knockoff TouchID sensors and putting your security and or personal information at risk?

Totally agree with you on this. I use Apple Pay and want it to be as secure as possible. I would only have my home button replaced at an Apple store.

But what if someone doesn't use Apple Pay? What if they have no desire to use it? Maybe instead of bricking the phone it would just leave Apple Pay disabled?

 

[69Mustang]

My opinion is not based on facts and is pure speculation and my opinion why it may have happened. You have your opinion how you believe the cause of the iphone being locked out it is not security related. I was pointing out a scenario in which it may have been a security update in IOS9 which handles unauthorized devices (like buttons) differently.

I doubt we will ever discover the reason why this happened though.

I'll ask again. What in my quote gave you impression I had an opinion about the bricking not being security related. Nothing in my quote even remotely suggests that.

 

[mkldev]

Glad to see Apple take security seriously in this instance. "Just disable the TouchID features if a component has been tampered with" is a non-starter when it comes to security. People really want thieves to get easier access to their data or one step closer to wiping and re-selling the phone? By replacing the Touch ID module to cause the device to drop that layer of security?

The device as a whole requires a passcode on reboot. So unless you already have the passcode, changing the Touch ID sensor won't give you access to anything. And if you do, changing the Touch ID sensor won't give you access to anything that you can't already access. (*)

(*) Some third-party apps require Touch ID auth, and if you don't disable Touch ID when a mismatched sensor is detected, it might be possible to swap Touch ID sensors and gain access to those apps using only the passcode. So it is marginally important to disable the Touch ID sensor in such a way that if the user reenables it, any previous data protected solely by Touch ID would be wiped.

But no, from a security perspective, this makes little sense unless bricking the device is the only way for them to disable Touch ID's access to the secure enclave after a certain number of authentication failures, in which case the hardware design is fundamentally wrong.

 

[XanderCrews]

You are the perfect Android customer...they don't care about security, either.

Um...wow. Wrong.
If you take the most recent version of iOS and Android, both are pretty secure. There isn't much of a difference, so long as people update their apps and OS in a timely manner.
If you have a cheaper Android phone running a 4 year old OS, well, yeah...security might be an issue if you install apps that aren't trustworthy...but that goes for any operating system on any platform. Old, unsecured software can cause problems on any device.
With Android (like anything else)...keep your apps updated and don't install apps from shady .ru sites (you can't by default, you have to enable this ability to bypass that security feature)...and don't user "password" as your password (did some of you *gasp* because I just posted your password?) if you practice that, you'll be 100% fine.
So in short, don't be stupid.

 

[69Mustang]

No it didn't, it just seemed to work until it broke. Exactly like TrimEnabler was an unsupported hack that broke with every OS update. And when you enable the new trimforce command, you get a warning it's all at your own risk and you should have backups. Apple can't make guarantees for parts from third-party manufacturers.

Source or did you just make something up?

 

[LovingTeddy]

You are the perfect Android customer...they don't care about security, either.

LOL... Macs don't have TouchID, iPod Touch has no touchid, iPhone 5 has no touchud. By your argument, Apple does nor care about security.

 

[supremedesigner]

I agree in principle, however, the error message should provide better communication to the user, not just Error 53. You know something like "iOS has detected a security issue with Touch ID. Please visit an authorized Apple repair location. Error 53."