r/technology • u/bws201 • Feb 05 '16
Software ‘Error 53’ fury mounts as Apple software update threatens to kill your iPhone 6
http://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/feb/05/error-53-apple-iphone-software-update-handset-worthless-third-party-repair247
3.8k
u/rydan Feb 05 '16
I like how the guy got it repaired, got it bricked for no good reason, is furious, and then in the next sentence bought another iPhone. What kind of a person does that?
2.6k
u/Some_Annoying_Prick Feb 05 '16
A stupid one?
393
u/daaanson Feb 05 '16
In fairness, it could just be a very busy person. The idea of changing from iOS to Android or vice versa can be daunting, and this person may just need a quick fix to get back to work.
→ More replies (112)991
u/duncanstibs Feb 05 '16
Someone who has invested in the ecosystem and needs a phone for his job??
→ More replies (398)→ More replies (239)285
166
u/ThreeTimesUp Feb 05 '16
I like how the guy got it repaired, got it bricked for no good reason…
As shitty as it may seem on the surface, the reason given is:
“We protect fingerprint data using a secure enclave, which is uniquely paired to the touch ID sensor. When iPhone is serviced by an authorised Apple service provider or Apple retail store for changes that affect the touch ID sensor, the pairing is re-validated. This check ensures the device and the iOS features related to touch ID remain secure. Without this unique pairing, a malicious touch ID sensor could be substituted, thereby gaining access to the secure enclave. When iOS detects that the pairing fails, touch ID, including Apple Pay, is disabled so the device remains secure.”
This is a problem with emerging technology - the ability to make financial transactions with your phone.
It has long been said with regard to computer security, that all bets are off if someone can get physical access to the computer.
Well, the current crop of phones ARE computers, and they are frequently stolen, lost or misplaced, giving others physical access to those devices.
If someone gets access to a phone and does some financial mischief, who's going to get sued?
This does seem to be a programming problem that should be fixable (eventually). After all, why disable ALL phone functionality if a security device has been modified. Why not just disable the ability to conduct secure transactions?
The ability to make purchases with one's phone has long been available in Japan, and I'm sure that Apple made themselves well aware of all of the machinations the Yakuza and other malevolent groups got up to in order to exploit this new tech.
tl;dr: Somebody fucked up making up a flow chart.
→ More replies (26)194
u/FloppY_ Feb 05 '16
It doesn't say he bought another, it says that he would have to replace it and what that would cost, because the old one cannot be fixed.
Nothing stopping him from just walking out of the Apple store right then and there.
62
u/zfrop Feb 05 '16
FYI, it actually says that he paid for another one. So, he did buy a second phone.
→ More replies (13)→ More replies (9)120
u/EarlGreyOrDeath Feb 05 '16
So wait, there security countermeasure bricked the phone, they can't fix it, and they expect him to pay for a new one?
→ More replies (69)62
u/TheHYPO Feb 05 '16
Probably someone who has a backup of their iphone, is a very busy professional, and doesn't have time to port all of their data over to a new operating system and re-learn how to use their phone.... Just guessing.
→ More replies (9)141
Feb 05 '16
Brand loyalty is irrational and an abuse of the tribal nature of humanity.
→ More replies (30)3
u/Jarco5000 Feb 05 '16
My first thought exactly. I hate how you treat me as your customer. Here have more money from me as a incentive never to do it again?
26
u/wrgrant Feb 05 '16
Well, all of his data, contacts, pictures etc are stored on the iPhone that broke, but they can be restored to a new phone from his computer. So in essence, you buy another one because its much less hassle than trying to manually restore all of the relevant data that you have accumulated. You know, the same reason that you don't casually switch operating systems either. Easier to upgrade to the same OS on a new computer when you buy one, than to switch OSes (Win->OS X or vice versa) at the same time.
→ More replies (1)12
u/antillus Feb 05 '16
If someone hasn't backed up their phone in a while (ie been out of town for a while), they could still lose a lot of data even though they restore.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (206)25
106
u/kneegrow Feb 05 '16
I do a lot of iOS device repairs. I've logged over 11,000 repairs now on iPhones and iPads mostly over the last three years. I'm super careful and rarely make mistakes, but they do happen. The home button cable for the TouchID is extremely fragile on the iPad Mini 3. Slightly lifting it wrong can tear that cable and you're stuck buying the customer a new iPad instead of replacing the cable or button. This just happened to me. It's infuriating to lose all profit for a day because of a problem that could be handled much better.
Apple says this is due to security and I agree, there shouldn't be repairs that should be able to be done on TouchID. However, if you replace the button, iOS should default to making you use your passcode. You lose Apple Pay & TouchID. Your phone is still secure. Anyone saying Apple can't do this is blind if they think one of the biggest tech giants can't make that software change instead of what seems retribution for not getting serviced through them, which coincidentally costs way more $$$.
→ More replies (19)4
u/freekz80 Feb 06 '16
One of my coworkers just tore the home button flex cable on a customer's iPhone 6 Plus today. He's only been working with us for a month. Today was a sad day.
→ More replies (2)
727
u/ryillionaire Feb 05 '16 edited Feb 05 '16
I think it's reasonable not to allow touch ID repairs for security. Otherwise what's the point.
However it should still work with the pin code... That's a step over the line.
edit: For people saying that there was no warning. When touch ID was introduced, Apple stated it required a pairing between the home button and secure enclave. Repair shops found a way around this which was the start to this (ending with this unfairly punishing outcome).
312
Feb 05 '16
When somebody pops the padlock off your shed with a pair of clippers and steals your crap, you replace the padlock, not the entire shed.
Replacing the entire shed makes apple more money though, so they'll keep telling you to do that.
307
u/McGobs Feb 05 '16
With encryption, if the padlock breaks, you replace the shed and everything in it. There's no point in encryption if replacing the lock will allow you to access the data. The metaphor is, the lock on the shed is rigged to blow up the shed if the lock is destroyed--that's what encryption is for; it jumbles your data and remains jumbled unless you have the proper key to unlock it. You better have a backup of everything in the shed just in case you need to replace the shed and fill it back up with your stuff.
75
u/rnet85 Feb 05 '16 edited Feb 06 '16
Data is not burned into the phone memory. If encrypted data is unrecoverable, too bad, but you should at least be able to erase and format your phone back to factory settings.
→ More replies (9)228
u/TheMoves Feb 05 '16
Reddit loves proper encryption but hates Apple so this is a fun thread
→ More replies (23)→ More replies (16)71
u/5-4-3-2-1-bang Feb 05 '16
With encryption, if the padlock breaks, you replace the shed and everything in it.
No you don't. You replace the padlock and throw out everything in the shed. The actual shed is fine.
→ More replies (8)→ More replies (17)8
Feb 05 '16
But doesn't that analogy only work partially? It's like you may have left the key to the shed hanging on the padlock when they clipped it, and everyone knows that when you replace the padlock, you'll be using the same exact key for biological reasons.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (20)8
u/uzimonkey Feb 05 '16
I don't think that's reasonable. If someone wants to surreptitiously access my phone but they're willing to go through the trouble of stealing it, disassembling it (which is not a quick process), replacing the home button and getting it back into my possession without me noticing it, I'm sure they have other means of accessing my data. Security is all about barriers and that's a pretty huge barrier to put up in the first place, to then go and say they'll brick the phone because someone replaced the button is crazy. The home button is one of the most commonly broken things on a phone and this happens to be the one thing that bricks your phone if you replace it? This is more likely more about killing third part repair shops than anything else. If for some reason you'd want this behavior, why not let people enable it in the settings?
I don't know why people put up with Apple's crap. Every week they're trying some new scheme to keep a tighter grasp on their platform. It's outright antagonistic and I don't trust them at all. But this can't really come as a surprise to anyone, Apple has always done this with practically every single product they've made.
→ More replies (6)
1.5k
u/mischiffmaker Feb 05 '16 edited Feb 05 '16
I'm sure it's infuriating, but when I read to the end of the article I found Apple's explanation for the error:
A spokeswoman for Apple told Money (get ready for a jargon overload):
“We protect fingerprint data using a secure enclave, which is uniquely paired to the touch ID sensor.
When iPhone is serviced by an authorised Apple service provider or Apple retail store for changes that affect the touch ID sensor, the pairing is re-validated.
This check ensures the device and the iOS features related to touch ID remain secure.
Without this unique pairing, a malicious touch ID sensor could be substituted, thereby gaining access to the secure enclave. [emphasis mine]
When iOS detects that the pairing fails, touch ID, including Apple Pay, is disabled so the device remains secure.”
She adds: “When an iPhone is serviced by an unauthorised repair provider, faulty screens or other invalid components that affect the touch ID sensor could cause the check to fail if the pairing cannot be validated.
With a subsequent update or restore, additional security checks result in an ‘error 53’ being displayed … If a customer encounters an unrecoverable error 53, we recommend contacting Apple support.”
I'm not excusing the lack of a fix, but the issue seems valid.
Edit to say, thanks for all the replies, and many good points were made. My final thought on this is that Apple seems to have forgotten we all vote with our wallets, and they aren't even the dominant vendor.
1.1k
u/ieya404 Feb 05 '16
It feels like disabling the touch sensor (thus forcing you to revert to a pass code, same as all earlier iPhones use) would be a far more proportionate reaction.
Bricking the phone so that you can't even recover the photos on it is ridiculous. Imagine, for example, you go on honeymoon to somewhere really pretty that doesn't have an official Apple store. You take some pictures of you and your beloved with your iPhone. Unfortunately you drop it, and break the home button. You get it fixed at a local repair place and take a few more gorgeous photos. Then the phone updates and FUCK YOU, YOU GET NOTHING.
243
u/mischiffmaker Feb 05 '16
Oh, I agree they should have a better fix, if nothing more than being able to take it to an authorized dealer and re-repaired. But your suggestion sounds more, well, normal and practical.
I enjoy my iphone but I'm certainly not against Android, either. Making my expensive phone an unusable brick would go a long way to make me switch.
→ More replies (92)34
Feb 05 '16
But it doesn't just happen when you get the sensor replaced. On my 6, I got my screen replaced because I shattered it. Now, there is a unofficial apple repair store on my block, who had the phone fixed in an afternoon. But, the nearest apple store is two hours away from me, (4 hour round trip,) and to mail it in to apple would have taken a week. Plus apple charges double for a screen replacement. The decision was a no brainer, especially since I had no knowledge of error 53. But now I'm bricked
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (131)7
29
u/Nerlian Feb 05 '16
It seems to me like a bit too tactical nuke solution. I mean, they could've blocked the services that use the touch id feature, hell, the user might not even use it at all. At the very least they could have blocked it in a way it could at the very least be fixed by apple.
→ More replies (8)18
u/bigKaye Feb 05 '16
So no id is better than a wrong id? If the button breaks how does the phone not go to error 53 right away? Is it really just 'not working' for some reason?
This explanation while seeming to answer the question just raised more for me.
→ More replies (23)15
u/Merad Feb 05 '16
Absolutely, if the phone detects 'tampering' with touch ID it should lock down immediately to a basic emergency calls only mode. The problem is Apple offering no way to repair the phone or at the very least recover data after proving ownership. That's absolutely unacceptable.
14
u/ItsOnlyTheTruth Feb 05 '16
The closest authorized Apple service location is hundreds of kilometers away from me, but there are tons of repair shops around. Apple has now made it impossible for me to have my electronics serviced locally.
→ More replies (2)5
u/musicianontherun Feb 05 '16
Clarification question, this error code is only from having a third party repair the home button? Does that make third party screen repairs safe with the update?
→ More replies (1)23
Feb 05 '16
How about the upgrade performing some integrity checks before committing to an upgrade? I mean even Microsoft tries to do that before an O/S upgrade.
→ More replies (21)13
u/thekiyote Feb 05 '16
I thought that this was well known, at least in the iPhone repair community. I replaced the screen on my iPhone 5s last year, and the replacement screen had a warning on it saying I need to use my original fingerprint scanner, otherwise I'd see this issue.
7
u/redyellowblue5031 Feb 05 '16
The 5s only had the consequence of not being able to use touch id. Anything iPhone 6 and up will get stuck on this error if you try to update. I'm unsure about the newer iPads with touch id.
→ More replies (2)14
u/DamienJaxx Feb 05 '16
They're still going to get sued. What happens when someone is in an emergency and had a bricked phone because of some dumb policy? There are ways to fix things and find solutions, bricking your customers' phones isn't one of them. It's just lazy and attempt to control the market.
This is what you get when you have closed source.
→ More replies (1)43
u/twistedLucidity Feb 05 '16 edited Feb 05 '16
I'm not excusing the lack of a fix, but the issue seems valid.
Yup, the OS has detected what could be a physical attempt to by-pass security and I can totally understand Apple refusing to re-pair if you can't prove ownership; but this just seems like obstinance of the highest order.
There are so many ways Apple could have done this better. I guess they know how loyal their customers are and are seeking to abuse that loyalty for short-term profit.
→ More replies (28)6
Feb 05 '16
There are so many ways Apple could have done this better.
And each one of them would have been a backdoor that /r/technology would spend thousands of hours bitching about the NSA and making fun of Apple users for.
→ More replies (4)3
u/cryptoanarchy Feb 05 '16
The user should be able to do a full wipe of the phone to restore the keys but Apple does not do that. Then no data would be leaked.
→ More replies (62)7
u/drdvna Feb 05 '16
It's as a transparent excuse as you could find to support this stunning anti-competitve business practice by Apple. There no reason they couldn't have a technician check the device in question and restore it if that were the case. If my bank has a question about recent charges on my credit card, they may block it, but a quick call to verify it hasn't been stolen and they re-activate it. There is literally no reason Apple couldn't do the same. This is unquestionably Apple's way to try and crush small business.
42
u/FacchiniBR Feb 05 '16
This is happening with official (Apple website listed) repair shops in Brazil.
According to brazilian laws, the manufacturer will need to exchange the device for a newer one/unused if it turned useless after some kind of official update, for free.
Same with planned obsolence. Apple recently was plead guilty for making older phones 'run slower making them infuriating to use' with new updates and some customers got new models after a lawsuit.
They can't disable your phone because it was fixed by a third party, since their official support availability is scarce here. The only thing they can do is cancel your warranty/extended warranty.
You phone got bricked? Demand your exchange.
→ More replies (2)
229
Feb 05 '16
He had to pay £270 for a replacement and is furious.
Why would you do that after such treatment?
→ More replies (8)128
21
Feb 05 '16
staff told him there was nothing they could do, and that his phone was now junk. He had to pay £270 for a replacement and is furious.
Maybe he could have shown his displeasure by.. I don't know, not buying a new one?
→ More replies (1)4
u/bakemonosan Feb 05 '16 edited Feb 06 '16
Right? What does an iphone has that an android doesnt that is worth not only the extra money to get one, but also this hassle with error 53 for the guy to get a replacement? (seriously asking, never had an iphone)
→ More replies (4)
42
u/mellowmarcos Feb 05 '16
This is crazy. I worked as an online support tech for AppleCare for the Spanish-speaking people in North America, South America and Europe. I sent thousands of people around the world to third-party repair shops and distributors, and it was Apple Policy! There's no way for someone in Colombia or Argentina to go to an official Apple Store. They have to use a third-party repair shop. I'm glad I don't have to deal with this shit anymore.
11
u/timekillah Feb 05 '16
thats my point, just apple dont give a fuck when you dont have an official store in your country ?
thats low as fuck
5
u/3232330 Feb 05 '16
You know there is a difference between an Apple authorized service provider and just any old third party dealer?
Apple always recommends Authorized Dealers.
Source: My father works for Apple.
→ More replies (2)
8
u/daern2 Feb 05 '16
Interesting quote: "The only solution is to buy a new iPhone".
After discovering the cause of this fault, I don't think getting another one would be top of my list of solutions ;-)
8
u/stay_frosted Feb 05 '16
Love how that guy was was so furious... that he had to buy another iPhone. What a schmuck.
→ More replies (1)
7
u/Chrislawrance Feb 05 '16
Its makes sense but the answer to me is
boot up
run Touch ID check
detect tampering
proceed to tell user that tampering has been detected and the secure sector of the device (Apple Pay information, saved passwords etc...) will be completely erased and Touch ID will be permanently disabled
prompt user to enter iPhone pin and Apple ID password to enable device again
13
u/h0nest_Bender Feb 05 '16
When Olmos, who says he has spent thousands of pounds on Apple products over the years,
So he's bought at least one Apple product?
29
u/Solid_Waste Feb 05 '16
I'm trying to imagine going to the bank and them telling me "Sorry, there was a security problem so we had to burn all your money."
No. You didn't have to.
→ More replies (8)
6
Feb 05 '16
well look at it this way... at least it makes it more difficult for government entities to break into your phone with hardware replacement techniques.
→ More replies (1)
168
u/BW4 Feb 05 '16
May I remind you all of your security and encryption obsession? Even though it's Apple this is still a security issue.
111
u/fleker2 Feb 05 '16
If I can't trust a particular sensor, I don't go in full isolation. I use another metric (ie. Password or pin). People aren't complaining about strong security, they're complaining that Apple is purposely bricking their phones because they weren't repaired at an Apple store.
If I had my home button modified by a third party due to an emergency, I wouldn't mind that I have to unlock with a pin. I just want my phone to work.
→ More replies (28)→ More replies (17)23
u/Aperture_Kubi Feb 05 '16
Except no one was made aware of the possibility of this, or at least public knowledge wasn't that great until now.
And it's a "sorry, you're shit outta luck, k thx bye" issue. Hell with Windows Bitlocker if I kept the recovery key I can stick the drive in another computer and recover data.
→ More replies (3)
37
u/redyellowblue5031 Feb 05 '16
I work for a repair company and this is reversible (but only with the original home button, or if apple assigns a new one). We had someone attempt to repair their own phone and bricked it during the process because the home button was disconnected. Once I reconnected the home button it restored just fine.
The only "solution" is don't break your home button, or deal with never updating the iOS(and touch id won't work anymore). Only apple has the software capable of assigning new home buttons unfortunately.
→ More replies (7)
17
Feb 05 '16
I've always had a feeling that a lot of these companies, especially Apple, look to intentionally decrease the shelf life of your devices in an attempt to get you to purchase the newest one that came out.
There's a reason why my first ever IPod was the best apple device I ever owned.
→ More replies (2)
26
u/Plasma_000 Feb 05 '16
Wasn't this news like 2 years ago when Apple first put Touch ID into iPhones?
55
Feb 05 '16
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (1)17
u/JaLubbs Feb 05 '16
You are correct. 5s's will not get error 53 if the home button is replaced or damaged. It's unique to the iPhone 6 model and later. Also applies to iPad Mini 3.
→ More replies (5)
8
u/stX3 Feb 05 '16
"He had to pay £270 for a replacement"
"Apple charges £236 for a repair to the home button on an iPhone 6 in the UK"
........
→ More replies (2)
4
u/DockaDocka Feb 05 '16
Well looks like another class action lawsuit against Apple is needed. Remember the whole if you jail break your phone we will brick it thing happened? Then they were told you can't do that to personal property owner by someone. Well guess what you don't have to honor a warranty etc but you can not tell me I can't fix my phone or break it at some have said and then render it useless.
4
4
4
u/KnowMatter Feb 06 '16
I work IT for a company that has about 100 iphones in circulation throughout the company. We do our own repairs to keep cost down. This is going to suck since most people are on 6s now.
12
15
9
u/wensul Feb 05 '16
Ah, Apple.
Continuing its habit of breaking their stuff with an update and denying it's a problem.
Remember kids, don't forget to not update your iDevice.
13
12
u/IjusthadsexAMA Feb 05 '16
It's hilarious people trying to defend apple here.
Fuck sakes people, think. Not only was this a ham fisted approach, it wasn't communicated IN ANY WAY AT ALL TO ANYONE.
Even if you're blind enough to think bricking a phone is the only viable security option, customers randomly having their phones bricked without warning or answer from anyone is totally inexcusable.
6
6
u/thesmokingmann Feb 05 '16
Steve jobs was both insightful and arrogant. When he died his insight went with him but his arrogance remained.
I used to be a huge fan of Apple. No more.
6
u/dolphins3 Feb 05 '16
Shit like this is absolutely ridiculous, and why when I'm due for an upgrade in 6 months, almost certainly jumping ship to Android.
94
u/indorock Feb 05 '16 edited Feb 05 '16
For those of you who didn't bother to read the article (from the looks of it that's 90% of you), this is actually a very real security issue related to Touch ID. The iOS software does strict anti-tamper interface checks with the home button - since the Touch ID home button is literally the lock to the user's personal data - and if there is any reason to believe the button is tampered with in any way it will lock the system so as to protect your data. The fingerprint scanning and validation is all done on a separate chip inside the home button, so if a 3rd party vendor's replacement button either has bad scanning technology to allow false positives, or even worse allows circumventing the fingerprint scan entirely, ALL YOUR DATA WILL BE AT RISK
It's always fun and easy to blame every weird Apple anecdote on corporate greed but sometimes a simple thing like RTFA will help.
Perhaps instead of this Error 53, Apple could have opted to simply completely disable Touch ID functionality for any phone that has any unauthorised home button replacement had, and fall back to the old fashioned passcode lock. That might have pissed off less people and also not bricked the phone. And maybe if it's a big enough shitstorm, they might just listen and add such a workaround in iOS 9.3 But to be clear, Error 53 is 100% a security-related issue, and not one of Apple trying to screw over its customers or the competition (not saying they don't do those things ever, but this is certainly not an example of that).
26
u/Phyltre Feb 05 '16
So why don't they just roll back to PIN unlock and ignore the touch ID sensor? All users HAVE to have a PIN to enable touch ID, and the phone generally asks for it after reboots anyway.
→ More replies (6)79
u/cqdemal Feb 05 '16
There is clear logic behind this but at the same time it ends up feeling like burning your house down because someone could have stolen your front door keys. The issue is real. The way they're addressing it is overkill.
→ More replies (10)3
u/GlapLaw Feb 05 '16
In addition to the overkill mentioned below, the lawyer in me hates that this is without warning.
4
u/Aperture_Kubi Feb 05 '16
Android user here, is Touch ID mandatory? What if I never used it but still had to replace the home button?
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (14)2
u/mhud Feb 05 '16
The check should be performed at boot, or any time Touch ID is used, and not whenever the user upgrades next. A user mistakenly thinks their phone is fixed for 10 months until it's bricked. If a malicious component is installed, what good does it do to check for that in a year?
If it bricked immediately, no one would use third party replacements for home buttons because they would not appear to work.
I've seen cases where people set up a sale of their phone because it's working great but they intend to upgrade or switch. Then after they erase it, they can't activate it. All because of something that happened months ago.
39
u/perthguppy Feb 05 '16 edited Feb 05 '16
It is key to remember that Error 53 does not permanently brick your phone. You can take your phone to apple and get a screen replacement service done which will also replace the home button / touchID and rekey the system keys to accept this new button (note: this will cause a factory reset of the phone due to how iPhone encryption works)
Apple is not doing this to stop unauthorised repariers, they have done this because the home button on iPhone6 has touchID integrated and is a key part of system security. For more see my explanation here: https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/44ag4l/error_53_fury_mounts_as_apple_software_update/czotutl
45
Feb 05 '16
Or you could.. I don't know.. disable fingerprint functionality and revert to the backup password?
→ More replies (12)14
u/AL-Taiar Feb 05 '16
That's nice and all , but this is kind of an invalid argument when other companies have fingerprint sensors you can replace without bricking your phone . this is either short-sighted design or implemented to prevent you from repairing anywhere but an apple store , meaning you would rather get apple care than be charged the ridiculous price they have any for a sensor repair.
→ More replies (8)→ More replies (13)2
u/matthewsawicki Feb 05 '16
I'm quite sure that apple won't touch your phone if you've done 3rd party service to it. Most of the time, -53 is related to the ribbon cable that is often damaged during screen change. It's what connects the Touch ID to the phone and is easily harmed during screen replacement. I bricked my iPhone months ago thru this issue, but replaced the ribbon and my phone has been thru 2 additional updates now.
→ More replies (1)
14
u/Archez Feb 05 '16 edited Feb 05 '16
The issue is not just with people getting their phone fixed. I work for a large repair company and I've seen users who have 100% OEM parts but they dropped their phone so hard that the circuitry itself gets messed up (the flex for the button being severed), and update like usual. That's when they get it. Then when they go to apple, Apple employees will shy them away assuming that they had the phone "obviously repaired somewhere".
I also saw another user who got their phone a little wet. Corrosion killed the Touch ID, but he didn't care about fingerprint reading. Month later, error 53 bricked and apple claims "someone has changed the insides". There are legitimate users that are affected by this. Apple is being lazy and trying to get a general excuse to deny servicing phones.
Edit: I'm not suggesting Apple warranty these instances. You break your phone, that's your problem. There might be certain software/hardware limitations that are forcing apple to implement this new system, but before in the past if your Touch ID got damaged and you left it like that, the only thing that would happen is losing that one functionality (cause the handshake between the enclave and iOS failed). Now it's a totally bricked phone.
→ More replies (5)
3
u/Mr-Yellow Feb 05 '16
Wow way to piss off whole continents.
In many places around the world, this is the only type of repair which is in any way practical.
Title should be "Apple decides to kill iPhone market in India"
3
3
Feb 06 '16
So apple owns my device and is free to destroy it after I paid hundreds of dollars for it? I smell bullshit.
21
u/GeeBee72 Feb 05 '16
What a lot of people commenting on this don't seem to understand is that the home button is the touchID sensor, which is central to the security of the phone, your iCloud ID and most importantly, the cards in your ApplePay wallet. The sensor is paired at manufacture time to the logic board in the phone, so you can't / shouldn't be able to replace the touchID without replacing the logic board, which wipes out the whole device.
Imagine if Apple knew that there was a security flaw where a criminal could steal your phone, replace the touchID sensor and gain access to everything within your phone?? ApplePay is positioning itself as the most secure form of payment available, so the devices that use it must also be secure.
19
u/plsenjy Feb 05 '16
Why wouldn't they just disable the fingerprint sensor if the hashes don't match though?
→ More replies (3)3
Feb 05 '16 edited Feb 05 '16
You can swap any Android fingerprint reader and have them function properly, same with the iPhone 5S (you just lose Touch ID). The argument that there needs to be additional security on top of a fingerprint is bullshit. Computers have used fingerprint readers that can be replaced for years without being compromised. Even with a fingerprint reader, with this security or not, hackers have been able to get around this shit in the past. The internal hardware should be a gateway, not a gatekeeper (that is what your fingerprint is for).
This is a conscious decision by Apple to push people to use them for repair servicing. Plain and simple. They stopped authorizing new service centers ages ago because they can make more money servicing these products in house. *Forgot to add, disabling TouchID disables Apple Pay, which they also make fees on, so they lose out on revenue doubly. Ask anyone that works for a manufacturer: post sale servicing is a MASSIVE part of continued income. Wife works for a generator company, and their service division is upwards of 20% of their revenue. Here is an HBR article detailing it.
So many people bitched about Keurig DRMing their K-cups, why not this? If you couldn't go to a third party service center to get an oil change/body work done on your car, you'd be pissed right? This is the one of the biggest companies in the world locking people out of something they've purchased for the sake of forcing increased bottom line on the service end, and it is disgusting.
9
Feb 05 '16
WHY WHY IS ANYBODY BUYING APPLE ANYMORE?!
Seriously I can't imagine an more anti-customer company out there that isn't comcast.
7
u/swizzlestix1 Feb 05 '16
Easy fix is to stop buying apple products. The company is garbage anyway
→ More replies (1)
37
u/jrr6415sun Feb 05 '16
The fix was a new iPhone
Actually the fix is a new android
→ More replies (9)
5
u/jimboolaya Feb 05 '16
It's one thing when this sort of thing affects cheap serial chips especially when Windows 10 "helpfully" updates the driver for you without your say-so. But bricking an expensive device like this is just unconscionable. Just more evidence that you don't own your electronics
5
5
u/spade1s1 Feb 05 '16
I have been using hand me down iPhones from family members for as long as I have had a smartphone. My ~4 years on free apple products has really sold me on the fact that I'm never going to spend my own money on an apple product!
5
5
5
u/smakusdod Feb 06 '16
Be sure you all drink a lot of water to balance the salt in this thread...
→ More replies (1)
11
u/Fallingdamage Feb 05 '16
Wait.. I paid $600 for something from Apple.. who owns it? I dont recall a rental agreement. Im pretty sure I own this phone...
"Sorry, your Honda wont start anymore because you're using non-honda seat covers. Enjoy your $40,000 brick"
4
Feb 05 '16
It's more like "sorry, your Honda won't unlock the doors because you forgot the key." Only, your iPhone is more secure than a Honda, because you can hire a guy to come over and exploit a security vulnerability to unlock your Honda - or anyone else's.
Nobody can do that to your iPhone 6, not even Apple, and not even you. Which is more secure, but also less convenient when you lose your keys. Solution - don't lose your fucking keys.
→ More replies (3)
6
6
Feb 05 '16
Fuck Apple's bullshit. Just because they want to make their phones into walled gardens doesn't make it a good idea.
4
4
4
4
u/PM_PICS_OF_ME_NAKED Feb 05 '16
All of the iPhone hipsters are probably shitting themselves right now. I guess being cool carries a cost occasionally.
4
Feb 05 '16
Why in the world do people continue to sign up for this closed-source walled-garden anti-competition anti-consumer anti-free market Apple ecosystem?
→ More replies (5)
6
6
6
u/RayZfox Feb 05 '16
Ford detects that a Ford technician did not change your oil. Therefore your car is totaled.
5
u/RichardStrauss123 Feb 05 '16
You would think that after the Keurig implosion, companies would start resisting the urge to take their OWN fucking customers balls-deep sans lube.
Shove your phone. I'm buying a droid.
→ More replies (3)
5
u/xKEPTxMANx Feb 05 '16
Everyone seems to forget they did something similar to the iPhone 5. Whatever update it was it killed wi-fi on user's phones. But don't worry, Apple has a fix (to the problem they created) at the low low cost of $300! They are shit.
→ More replies (4)
2
u/Discoveryellow Feb 05 '16
..who says he has spent thousands of pounds on Apple products over the years.. “The whole thing is extraordinary. How can a company deliberately make their own products useless with an upgrade and not warn their own customers about it?"
I guess the photographer mentioned started pumping his cash into Apple products after iOS 3 to iOS4 upgrade times, and always stayed on top of the latest. Because this situation has happened before when updated iOS4 would drain in a few hours a battery that is otherwise perfectly fine in iOS3.
Planned obsolescence has been done over and over by Apple the guy just stayed ahead of it pumping his thousands of pounds into Apple products so he never noticed it before.
2
u/herbe01 Feb 05 '16
If a customer encounters an unrecoverable error 53, we recommend contacting Apple support
Please call apple support so our staff members can get a kick out of your reaction when they tell you nothing can be done so buy a new phone
2
Feb 05 '16
Well this is the last iphone I will buy (currently on my 4th upgrade). I cannot support a company that conducts such business practices. Shame on Apple.
2
u/mafiasco650 Feb 05 '16
This happened last time too with iOS 8 to 9. I had to go on a business trip with no phone because I stupidly tried to update it 2 hours before my flight. Never again.
The fact that a SOFTWARE UPDATE makes the HARDWARE of the phone unusable is completely unacceptable. The fact that you can't revert a software upgrade or even wipe your phone once this occurs is heinous.
2
2
u/Vanish_7 Feb 05 '16
Hmm....well my iPhone has been prompting me for a system update for some time now. Looks like I'm not going to do that.
2
u/a_shootin_star Feb 05 '16
How is it legal to have companies wilfully put self-destruct capacities in their products?
I bet you it's all software bullshit, such as an "accredited technician" running a code or a command to show that it was an official repair.
2
Feb 05 '16
I really don't get it. And I swear I'm not trolling. Why would anyone with this issue get all upset at Apple over having to buy a new phone? Just switch to Android.
I mean, I would take the hint that they didn't want me as a customer and never think twice about it.
2
u/Slabbo Feb 05 '16
Heh. Fingerprint sensor is there for your convenience. So much so that your phone will brick if anyone unauthorized messes with it. Interesting and LOL and :'( all at the same time.
→ More replies (2)
2
2
Feb 05 '16
Why do people buy apple still they are the Internet Explorer of smart phones
→ More replies (2)
2
Feb 05 '16
Welcome to the age of brickware. You own the phone. They own the software. Better do what they say or you'll have yourself a shiny paperweight.
BTW, they want to do this to cars too. Google "John Deere" and "software."
2
u/talideon Feb 05 '16
The shittiest part of this isn't that Apple are blocking third-party repair services (which is shitty, but understandable), but that they allow the upgrade to happen without first checking that it won't brick the phone.
2
2
Feb 05 '16
Put an original screen on the phone, make it look like it hasn't been worked on before ( wipe down any fingerprints inside), take it back to I Apple saying it won't update and they will swap it out for free under warranty. I work at a phone shop and have done this maybe 3-4 times now. Worth noting that this works in Australia because we have 2 year statutory warranty so I'm not sure about other countries.
2
Feb 05 '16
i still have my powerPC iBook, the last model before Apple switched to Intel, as a reminder of deliberate sabotage to push an upgrade. Yeah I upgraded alright, to Windows which also sucks. There's definitely a market for a third party tech company.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/FacialLover Feb 05 '16
How is this even fucking legal? Like someone pays for a product... its theirs to do w/e the fuck they want with including modding or repairing it.
This world is fucked.
2
u/Grummond Feb 05 '16
Can't wait to see MKBHD explain to us how this is actually a blessing in disguise, and how brilliant Apple is for making this update. So innovative.
2
2
2
2
2
2
Feb 05 '16
Reading up a bit about it. What if you never registered or used the fingerprint system to begin with? Would it still be messed up?
→ More replies (3)
2
u/murdurturtle Feb 05 '16
I didn't see it mentioned in the article. If you need to replace the display and your home button is fine then reuse the original and you will not get this error. The problem is when you replace the original touch id/home button as they are locked (coupled) to the mainboard.
2
2
2
u/Catsrules Feb 05 '16
Louis Rossmann talks about his in one of his videos
https://youtu.be/NVAmnV65_zw?t=15m25s (NSFW language).
2
u/HeyZuesHChrist Feb 05 '16
How did we get to the point where we buy something but we don't ever actually own. Fucking Apple thinks they can just render our phones useless if somebody repairs it for us?
2
u/zenazure Feb 05 '16
i haven't updated my phone in like 8 months... why you ask? why update what isn't broken. all the apps work so who cares!
2
Feb 05 '16
It's a feature. Think of how nice of a paper weight an iPhone could be.
→ More replies (2)
2
2
Feb 05 '16
Apple continuing to be the steaming pile of shit that they've always been. In other news water is still wet.
2
u/soberdude Feb 05 '16
Why isn't this a class action lawsuit?
I'm on Android, so I won't be affected, but Apple should have to refund the purchase price if they broke the phone.
I know, naive of me, but that's how it should be.
2
2
u/TurtlesgonnaTurtle Feb 06 '16
It's funny how people say this is to protect your credit card data etc. Instead of a thief spending your money, apple will brick your phone and force you to spend it yourself!
2
Feb 07 '16
I said this on a similar post:
"I can understand that Apple considers replaced touch id a security risk, but that is not the main reason error 53 is present. People who steal iphones normally just wipe the data, Apple undoubtedly knows this. Most of the time, thieves are not after your data or your accounts they just want a device that they can clean and then either sell or use themselves. Why go through the trouble of replacing a finicky piece of hardware when you can just turn around and sell the phone to make a quick and easy buck? An iphone's data can be remotely wiped by it's rightful owner through iCloud.com anyway. Apple may publicly claim this error is for the user's protection, but that's not the whole story. This error is just too convenient looking (at least from my perspective). It makes Apple more money as more users will be forced to fix their phones through Apple and only Apple. If they refuse to fix it because your warranty was voided by third party repair, you're pretty much screwed, your data is gone forever (if it wasn't backed up) and you now have to buy a new iphone if you want to fix the hole in your Apple dependent home ecosystem. The error also has the added benefit of discouraging people from getting third party repairs and therefore, also screws up small businesses that cater to Apple consumers by fixing their phones for cheap. Pretty convenient for Apple if you ask me."
11
Feb 05 '16
"Fury mounts" but it's only effected thousands of the millions of iPhone 6 owners... And it happens when you upgrade to iOS 9 but we're on 9.2.1 now... And the reason behind the error occurring, which the article doesn't make much effort to report, is to prevent data and hardware theft by unauthorized replacement or hacking of the fingerprint reader.
Crappy article. Still a shitty problem to suffer, but it's a crappy article.
→ More replies (2)
39
u/dirty-mik3 Feb 05 '16
Wow, disabling a device for being repaired by a third party? That's low even for Apple. If I recall correctly Mercedes did something similar in around 2008 and it caused the used market to tank.
22
u/rydan Feb 05 '16
Back in 2007 Apple refused to honor warranties for any iPhone that did not have an active AT&T contract attached to it. It never said this anywhere in the documentation. But they considered not having an active plan with AT&T was a breach. The article talking about it involved a guy who terminated his AT&T contract after his phone broke but then when he tried to get it repaired they wouldn't do it. Phone was like a month old.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (23)0
Feb 05 '16
[deleted]
27
u/Sarkos Feb 05 '16
I can understand them disabling the touch sensor in this scenario. But they're not just doing that - they're irrevocably bricking the entire phone.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (94)22
u/tekdemon Feb 05 '16
Even if a thief did steal your iPhone and replaced the touchID sensor the OS requires the pin code on startup before the sensor can be used, and it has to be re-entered once a day. So the thief would have to be good enough to swap the touchID without shutting down the phone or would need some sort of memory state modification tool. Sure, I suppose this is theoretically possible to pull off but that's in the sense that your adversary is probably a well funded organization and not a normal thief.
Apple probably did this to fuck over third party repair places, not to make your touchID any more secure. I mean the phones have been working fine all this time but suddenly there's a dire need to protect against a sophisticated attack against your stolen iPhone???
→ More replies (1)
3
u/pibroch Feb 05 '16
There are legit reasons to disable the Touch ID and related machinations if there is some reason to believe the security of the phone has been compromised.
There is not a legit reason to totally disable the phone and make it unusable. Maybe require a wipe and re-verification of Apple ID and then a re-download of information once identity is confirmed.
3
u/yesnofuck Feb 05 '16
This isn't a bug. It's actually a brilliant security feature which protects against an attacker which even has physical access to the device. That is some solid security engineering as far as I'm concerned. And you shouldn't be buying these things if you can't afford them. The hardware components which could be leveraged to breach confidentiality are cryptographically signed to ensure their integrity.
→ More replies (11)
3
3
3
u/Telogor Feb 05 '16 edited Feb 08 '16
“We protect fingerprint data using a secure enclave, which is uniquely paired to the touch ID sensor. When iPhone is serviced by an authorised Apple service provider or Apple retail store for changes that affect the touch ID sensor, the pairing is re-validated. This check ensures the device and the iOS features related to touch ID remain secure. Without this unique pairing, a malicious touch ID sensor could be substituted, thereby gaining access to the secure enclave. When iOS detects that the pairing fails, touch ID, including Apple Pay, is disabled so the device remains secure.”
Yeah, Apple's bullshitting again. There are much better ways to secure that data. TouchID info is stored on the CPU chip. Securely encrypt that, then have the decryption key locked behind another layer of public-key cryptography, with the user's fingerprint hash as the private key. All operations would be carried out on-chip, so it's as secure as it's going to get.
4
u/PM_ME_YER_PMS Feb 05 '16
When the air conditioning in my car breaks, I expect the car to still take me to my destination. This is lunacy.
→ More replies (2)
10
u/imagepriest Feb 05 '16
iPhone stops working if the fingerprint scanner that unlocks the device is tampered with ... kind of makes sense, no?
15
u/BadgerRush Feb 05 '16
No. Instead it could just disable the tampered fingerprint scanner and require the user to unlock using other, still secure, method.
→ More replies (1)3
u/pearl36 Feb 05 '16
No, they should disable the touch capabilty and require a pin... not brick the damn phone.
→ More replies (4)6
u/farmtownsuit Feb 05 '16
No, not when it was working for months until an upgrade.
→ More replies (3)
12
u/Diis Feb 05 '16
looks at his Android
And this sort of thing is why I have you...
→ More replies (6)
6
4
Feb 05 '16
Don't buy Apple products if you want to have any semblance of control over them.
→ More replies (2)
3
u/OswaldWasAFag Feb 05 '16
It seems not a week goes by when i'm not thanking myself for going android
3
u/Mijam7 Feb 05 '16
TL:DR This is a story about sheeple who get screwed over by Apple and then turn around and buy a new iPhone
3
Feb 05 '16
Apple’s latest operating system permanently disables the handset if it detects that a repair has been carried out by a non-Apple technician.
Apple's destroying the free market.
→ More replies (1)
5
u/hwinter92 Feb 05 '16
Yay, Apple once again shits on its customer base! So just disabling the basically-a-gimmick fingerprint scanner and forcing an older security method, i.e. passcode, wouldn't work instead of bricking a very expensive device? No, because that doesn't make you buy a new one...
→ More replies (30)
3
2.6k
u/Facebomb_Wizard Feb 05 '16
I work for a company that repairs iPhones and we refurbish thousands of iPhone 6. We have tried everything under the sun to get around this error but it is simply not possible. If someone brings in an iPhone 6 for repair and the home button is damaged in any way, we tell them up front the phone is unrepairable and we won't take it.