• Lawfirm considers Lawsuit over iPhone's Touch ID-connected 'Error 53'

    .
    A lawfirm in Seattle is considering a class action lawsuit against Apple, in regards to "Error 53" message showing for some iPhone owners which have had unofficial "dodgy" repairs to their iPhone's Touch ID sensor.



    Sources say, 'PCVA' which is the firm investigating the option and also soliciting complaints from people affected by this glitch. The message is usually triggered when people get unauthorized repairs which tampers with the Touch ID sensor and then try to update or restore their iPhone. The phone is then unusable and avoids warranty.

    PCVA claimed, noting that the public would find it unacceptable if car makers forced drivers to bring vehicles into an official dealership for service. PCVA has made a few comments.

    "We believe Apple may be intentionally forcing users to use their repair services, which cost much more than most third-party repair shops,"
    The firm has also said it would represent any affected people coming forward for free.

    In its defense, Apple has said that it's trying to protect the security of users. Touch ID normally saves data in a component known as the Secure Enclave, and in theory unofficial parts could be used to steal a user's fingerprint. During official repairs Apple re-validates the pairing between the Touch ID sensor and the Enclave.

    If you're impacted by Error 53 to contact Apple Support, but to date the only known solution has been to get a replacement iPhone.
    This article was originally published in forum thread: Lawfirm considers Lawsuit over iPhone's Touch ID-connected 'Error 53' started by Caiden Spencer View original post
    Comments 18 Comments
    1. luvmytj's Avatar
      luvmytj -
      So I guess I can sue Mercedes Benz now since I had to go through them to get a new key as it is considered a security part and they are only available through the dealer. How is this any different? If they didn't do it someone would sue cause it was to easy to steal their info. Freaking lawyers...
    1. Caiden Spencer's Avatar
      Caiden Spencer -
      Quote Originally Posted by luvmytj View Post
      So I guess I can sue Mercedes Benz now since I had to go through them to get a new key as it is considered a security part and they are only available through the dealer. How is this any different? If they didn't do it someone would sue cause it was to easy to steal their info. Freaking lawyers...
      I guess you can haha!
    1. Ambi_Valence's Avatar
      Ambi_Valence -
      Quote Originally Posted by luvmytj View Post
      So I guess I can sue Mercedes Benz now since I had to go through them to get a new key as it is considered a security part and they are only available through the dealer. How is this any different? If they didn't do it someone would sue cause it was to easy to steal their info. Freaking lawyers...
      Nice try but not quite. I can still use the key to get into the car and do various things, admittedly not drive it but a car isn’t quite the same. Also neither their warranty or EULA state anything even close to 'security part’.

      Apple brick the phone. Completely. Given that TouchID is a convenience, not a necessity, the system should block out the parts that would utilise it and fall back to the passcode which is the first level of security in the device hierarchy anyway.
    1. bmwraw8482's Avatar
      bmwraw8482 -
      Quote Originally Posted by luvmytj View Post
      So I guess I can sue Mercedes Benz now since I had to go through them to get a new key as it is considered a security part and they are only available through the dealer..
      You obviously stole your Mercedes! [emoji12]
    1. cpotoso's Avatar
      cpotoso -
      Sounds reasonable. Apple should perhaps disable the touch ID device (and any item that DEPENDS on it, and can't be opened with a password) but should not disable the entire phone. Also: why can't the hashed fingerprints be stored in the phone rather than in the sensor? This actually seems backwards and a serious security issue.
    1. vinaygoel2000's Avatar
      vinaygoel2000 -
      Quote Originally Posted by Ambi_Valence View Post
      Nice try but not quite. I can still use the key to get into the car and do various things, admittedly not drive it but a car isn’t quite the same. Also neither their warranty or EULA state anything even close to 'security part’.

      Apple brick the phone. Completely. Given that TouchID is a convenience, not a necessity, the system should block out the parts that would utilise it and fall back to the passcode which is the first level of security in the device hierarchy anyway.
      Not being able to drive a car is the same as bricking it. I don't go in my car to listen to music or have sex. I go in it to drive it.
    1. FreshOutTheWash's Avatar
      FreshOutTheWash -
      Quote Originally Posted by vinaygoel2000 View Post
      Not being able to drive a car is the same as bricking it. I don't go in my car to listen to music or have sex. I go in it to drive it.
      Hmmmm... Me and you have two completely different uses for our cars I guess....
    1. vinaygoel2000's Avatar
      vinaygoel2000 -
      Quote Originally Posted by FreshOutTheWash View Post
      Hmmmm... Me and you have two completely different uses for our cars I guess....
      What do u use your car for, if I may ask?
    1. ZipZapp's Avatar
      ZipZapp -
      Quote Originally Posted by luvmytj View Post
      So I guess I can sue Mercedes Benz now since I had to go through them to get a new key as it is considered a security part and they are only available through the dealer. How is this any different? If they didn't do it someone would sue cause it was to easy to steal their info. Freaking lawyers...
      I was told when I bought the car that if I lose my car key it is very expensive to replace, and that I can only replace via the dealer.

      When did Apple do the same?

      Not every dealer requires that they key be purchased through them and key shops surely know when the can and cannot replace a key.

      Apple kept their information a secret from consumers and repair shops, bricked phones and also turned away those seeking help claiming there was nothing they could do. All the while they knew that they could sell the consumer a new home button and pair it to the motherboard.

      Bottom line for me, its a phone and not a car. Bricking the phone was going too far considering there was as effective things they could have done.
    1. ericidle's Avatar
      ericidle -
      Have you ever heard of anyone having this error on their iPhone, No? me neither!

      Yet the Papers and News Media are full of it, saying thousands are affected due Apples arrogance!

      So what is Error53, well it’s an errors caused by getting a non-approved repair to your iPhone home button which included the Touch ID controller, this is the sensor which protects your security on the iPhone and is unbreakable (excuse the pun) even by Apple or Government agencies. These agencies aren’t happy about that as they can’t access your phone without your consent. If a non-approved repair is made it can corrupt the biometrics data securely stored and this makes the iPhone useless, this is an integral part of the security mechanism so that anyone trying to defeat this security feature by removing or replacing the fingerprint scanner won’t be able to access the iPhone. This is a perfectly sensible way to protect your iPhone from unauthorised intrusion. If anyone was allowed to bypass this it would effectively be the backdoor that security agencies are asking for. If Apples security could be overcome by simply changing the home button, there would have been a media outcry about how weak their security was

      Apple have led the fight for personal security against big brother intrusion and have taken this to the Whitehouse meeting with government departments to explain their position. Apple themselves have no back door and cannot access your device by any means, so security agencies have threatened to take them to court to introduce one, or to prevent the sale of these devices in certain countries (Britain included) this pressure so far has come to nothing.

      So what do these Security agencies do now……………

      Here’s a thought, why not whip up a media storm about Apple arrogantly forcing you to use only high price Apple approved repairers to replace this sensor, claiming that thousands of anonymous “people” have been affected and have been left with a £600 paperweight, then get news media and press together to pressure Apple to weaken their security and allow anyone to bypass this vital security feature.

      Who would be the winner there I ask you? The thousands of anonymous “people” who have reputedly managed to damage beyond repair the home button on their iPhone 5S, 6 or 6S and tried to save a few pounds by risking their £600 iPhone with a backstreet repair shop

      Or the security services who have been unable to convince the courts to force Apple to give them a backdoor………. #justsayin


      Oops must dash there’s someone at the door!!
    1. ZipZapp's Avatar
      ZipZapp -
      Quote Originally Posted by ericidle View Post
      Have you ever heard of anyone having this error on their iPhone, No? me neither!

      Yet the Papers and News Media are full of it, saying thousands are affected due Apples arrogance!

      So what is Error53, well it’s an errors caused by getting a non-approved repair to your iPhone home button which included the Touch ID controller, this is the sensor which protects your security on the iPhone and is unbreakable (excuse the pun) even by Apple or Government agencies. These agencies aren’t happy about that as they can’t access your phone without your consent. If a non-approved repair is made it can corrupt the biometrics data securely stored and this makes the iPhone useless, this is an integral part of the security mechanism so that anyone trying to defeat this security feature by removing or replacing the fingerprint scanner won’t be able to access the iPhone. This is a perfectly sensible way to protect your iPhone from unauthorised intrusion. If anyone was allowed to bypass this it would effectively be the backdoor that security agencies are asking for. If Apples security could be overcome by simply changing the home button, there would have been a media outcry about how weak their security was

      Apple have led the fight for personal security against big brother intrusion and have taken this to the Whitehouse meeting with government departments to explain their position. Apple themselves have no back door and cannot access your device by any means, so security agencies have threatened to take them to court to introduce one, or to prevent the sale of these devices in certain countries (Britain included) this pressure so far has come to nothing.

      So what do these Security agencies do now……………

      Here’s a thought, why not whip up a media storm about Apple arrogantly forcing you to use only high price Apple approved repairers to replace this sensor, claiming that thousands of anonymous “people” have been affected and have been left with a £600 paperweight, then get news media and press together to pressure Apple to weaken their security and allow anyone to bypass this vital security feature.

      Who would be the winner there I ask you? The thousands of anonymous “people” who have reputedly managed to damage beyond repair the home button on their iPhone 5S, 6 or 6S and tried to save a few pounds by risking their £600 iPhone with a backstreet repair shop

      Or the security services who have been unable to convince the courts to force Apple to give them a backdoor………. #justsayin


      Oops must dash there’s someone at the door!!
      Thanks for sharing these useless thoughts and opinions. It is a real issue and one that Apple will now be forced to fix via an update. That is the whole point of this threat from lawyers.

      Otherwise, Apple will do what they always do...let years go by before the concede and fix.

      BTW...whats this got to dash line??? Silly.
    1. Purple Minion's Avatar
      Purple Minion -
      It never ceases to amaze me the lengths fanboys will go to try to defend Apple. No matter what Apple says or does, they always defend them. In my opinion that's not loyalty, it's stupidity.
    1. luvmytj's Avatar
      luvmytj -
      It has nothing to do with fanboys. It has everything to do with security. Do I want someone to get my credit card info, etc? If any ole person can replace your security feature it really isn't that secure so Apple rightfully makes it near impossible to do. It all makes perfect sense to reasonable people. The same reason I can go to Home depot and have my Mercedes keys, they have to be gotten via the dealer only as a security part. Stupidity would be to allow anyone to make that repair, makes sense now doesn't it. And if you are an Apple hater why are you here anyways?
    1. szr's Avatar
      szr -
      @luvmytj: Disabling that feature is well and good, but disabling the entire device is completely unnecessary and unwarranted.
    1. Caiden Spencer's Avatar
      Caiden Spencer -
      Quote Originally Posted by szr View Post
      @luvmytj: Disabling that feature is well and good, but disabling the entire device is completely unnecessary and unwarranted.
      Correct and this little handy tweak prevents that
    1. luvmytj's Avatar
      luvmytj -
      Quote Originally Posted by szr View Post
      @luvmytj: Disabling that feature is well and good, but disabling the entire device is completely unnecessary and unwarranted.
      If it doesn't disable it what would the point of having it at all? Disabling it is the security part of it all, bypassing it would render a fingerprint useless and allow stolen phones to be used. The whole point is to keep data secure and to prevent stolen phones from being sold as useable devices.
    1. szr's Avatar
      szr -
      @luvmytj: I understand what you mean, but it should not just be inexplicably bricking the device. If anything, it should ask for the owner's apple id to be entered when restoring, like it does already. Issuing (seemingly) random errors just doesn't seem to be the right way to go about this.
    1. luvmytj's Avatar
      luvmytj -
      Looks like they have released an update to address the issue so problem solved I suppose.
  • Connect With Us

  • Twitter Box

  • Facebook