Guessing the 6L80? The reason is the Trans control module is built into the valve body and requires programming to the vehicle as it could be put in a few different platforms. This one isn't that bad, but you need a Tech-II, MDI, or aftermarket calibration tool to program it. Standard OBD-II scanner can't do it.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
iPhones Disabled If Apple Detects Third-Party Repairs
- Thread starter Megalith
- Start date
Guessing the 6L80? The reason is the Trans control module is built into the valve body and requires programming to the vehicle as it could be put in a few different platforms. This one isn't that bad, but you need a Tech-II, MDI, or aftermarket calibration tool to program it. Standard OBD-II scanner can't do it.
Yep. I suspect there will be lawsuit, and Apple will have to change this.
Maybe they can just flash a warning on the screen, but still allow the phone to work.
It's illegal in most states to void the warranty on the product if it was repaired by a 3rd party, unless the repair cause the damage.
If I put 3rd party headlights on my car, the dealer can't refuse to cover a failed transmission, unless they can prove the 3rd party headlights somehow caused the transmission failure.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2004
- Messages
- 21,888
Why not just force backup password entry and a rescan of all fingerprints?
What happens if the hardware is compromised?
Wouldn't happen so much if the big bad bank would stop behaving like a big, bad bank. Let's see; federal funds rate (the rate banks charge each other) 0.5%, customer savings account return rate <1%, 30 yr mortgage rate 4%, credit card for customers rate normally 18% and up to 27.9%. Fees for everything; a child can no longer open a savings account, because it will quickly get wiped out by fees. Yes, they get to charge YOU for them using your money. and that's what makes them big, bad banks
And there you go. They 'gotcha'. Continuous influx of cash from your wallet to Apple.
They don't want you to have a phone older than two years. They will 'update' all the software so that eventually, the phone will no longer be able to operate the apps which automatically update, and they will remove old versions of apps that ran fine on the older firmware, so you can't have them anymore. The whole idea is to create perpetual customers who buy a new hardware product every 2 years, and remain under contract. Which is fine if you make enough money. Not so fine if you have five people in one family all getting sucked in, and it costing you $500 (or more) a month. That's >$6000 a year. Before taxes. Just for phone service.
You own the phone. They own the programs that run it. I'm pretty sure somewhere in the EULA Apple has some kind of line which keeps ownership of everything for themselves, as well as things you'd never agree to if it were stated up front instead of in a 8 billion page EULA which you'd go blind if you actually tried to read the whole damn thing. You just RENT the apps/firmware. They decide what you are allowed to do with it, and, of course, how much you have to pay them in order to do so.
Ain't America great? The business of America is business, to screw the customers, while making them think it's a good idea. We each try to lie to each other, and cheat each other out of as much money as possible, while making them feel guilty so they'll just accept the BOHICA. Get shafted by Apple? Figure out a way to shaft your own customers who work for Apple to get some of that money back. After all, it's the American way!
Really. Just completely brick a device due to one compromised component. How about just disable those security functions? Online payment and secure lock are no longer accessible, easy.
No. That's not an acceptable solution.
Reason being is that Apple gives no recourse except for total replacement of the physical phone unit, when physical functionalities wasn't the issue. I can understand Apple using this error 53 so that the owner will personally go down to the Apple store in order to verify his/her ownership and to have the phone unbricked, but I cannot in good conscience accept the scenario where Apple is forcing another physical unit.
Hell, Apple can make that case to the consumers that they should consider switching a phone, but if it's security that they argue, then a proof of ownership to get your phone unbricked would be acceptable, not this kind of coercion.
JustReason
razor1 is my Lover
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2015
- Messages
- 2,483
That is illegal by law. There maybe some time frame but a Factory must make tools and reference materials available to general mechanics. Now there is no law regulating cost. You see this easily with VW who changes their screws and such every few years requiring new tools which only they sell.
Vermillion
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2007
- Messages
- 4,416
Not appropriate at any level. There's zero reason to brick the device. It isn't their phone. Bricking the device with zero warning it completely unacceptable.
They should simply disable TouchID, disable Apple Pay, force use of the PIN lockscreen, block any further iOS updates and notify the user to head to an Apple store to get a certified replacement.
When if the fingerprint sensor was replaced with a cheap Chinese knockoff that's bugged from the beginning with a backdoor in it? It's not the first time we've seen cheap Chinese replacement parts coming with a firmware backdoor in it. Do you really want to take a chance that the replacement part has a backdoor in it or even worse, takes any fingerprint to unlock it regardless of the fact that it's the right fingerprint or not? Most certainly not.
Heck, if I were Apple I'd verify the authenticity of the fingerprint reader at every boot. That way if law enforcement were to replace said fingerprint reader with one known to accept any fingerprint regardless of the fact that it's the right fingerprint or not they would be stopped in their tracks.
We live in a scary world in which we are fast approaching a police state. Anything to secure our devices even more so and to prevent overzealous law enforcement agencies from overstepping their bounds.
Heck, if I were Apple I'd verify the authenticity of the fingerprint reader at every boot. That way if law enforcement were to replace said fingerprint reader with one known to accept any fingerprint regardless of the fact that it's the right fingerprint or not they would be stopped in their tracks.
We live in a scary world in which we are fast approaching a police state. Anything to secure our devices even more so and to prevent overzealous law enforcement agencies from overstepping their bounds.
This will not change unless the the end consumer absolves all financial responsibility of Apple in case a security breach that us found due to a bugged sensor. Courts will side with apple hands down since they consciously cannot transfer legal troubles from one issue to another.
In regards to unbricking phones with idea, the ultimate issue arises with the parts and repair. If the authenticity of said parts and quality of repair are not upto spec then apple just like all the car mfgs can and have denied warranty claims. No amount of legal work has overturned that.
In regards to unbricking phones with idea, the ultimate issue arises with the parts and repair. If the authenticity of said parts and quality of repair are not upto spec then apple just like all the car mfgs can and have denied warranty claims. No amount of legal work has overturned that.
Trepidati0n
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2004
- Messages
- 9,269
This. That would be an appropriate response by Apple.
There's a difference between locking the phone and bricking the phone. I think that the phone should simply warn the user so that they can get it properly repaired. Further steps as Vermillion suggests would also be good.
Anything beyond invalidating the factory warranty should be illegal.
The complaint here would be different but basically the same. You are being forced to go to apple for the repair.
To me, it comes to this. The issue is when the touchID sensor is damaged, so if it's damaged during the repair of something else, it's the people who repaired it responsibility to make it right because they should have been more careful. And for that matter if the issue was with the sensor they should know by now to not accept the device for service.
At least it's to the point now that it can be replaced by someone. Apple originally just issued a new phone to the customer if the sensor was damaged as it wasn't field replaceable
Vermillion
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2007
- Messages
- 4,416
No you're forced to go to a trusted Apple repair shop. There are plenty of Mom and Pop repair shops who can replace this part and you won't get Error 53.
You can't just buy some off the shelf piece of hardware from China and slap it in the iPhone. The issue here isn't that the replacement TouchID hardware is necessarily faulty. The issue is that it isn't Apple approved/licensed or however they want to word it so they can't guarantee it isn't malware in disguise.
I can't disagree with Apple in terms of them being unable to verify the integrity of the part in terms of security. They're 100% correct is saying it may be poisoned firmware or something.
All Apple has to do is check for integrity and then simply disable TouchID and do the other things I mentioned earlier.
Apple has absolutely no reason to brick a device with no warning. That's the issue here. Protecting users from security breaches is a good thing. Bricking their phone with no warning simply isn't the way to do it.
True bricking their device is bad, but if the mfg sees this is the only way to limit liability for them and the end user, theres nothing stopping them from doing so. Again unless the parts and biz providing repair services form some sort of legal agreement, Apple is in the legal right, but maybe ethically wrong.
Krenum
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2005
- Messages
- 19,193
Of course, its always been Apples way or no way.
same with every gigantic tech company sadly. You are their mercy with their intellectual property
How do you differentiate keeping out people who stole your phone and are screwing around with the hardware to bypass security, and a simple repair by the authorized owner? The part this flips out over is the lock, which makes the issue this complicated.
Vermillion
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2007
- Messages
- 4,416
It's not complicated at all.
If you get your TouchID repaired by an Apple approved repair shop you don't get Error 53.
If you get your TouchID repaired by an non-Apple approved repair shop you get Error 53.
All Apple has to do instead of bricking the device with Error 53 is simply disable TouchID, disable Apple Pay, disable iTunes purchases, and notify them to visit an Apple store. It's simple and it doesn't requiring bricking a persons phone without warning them.
I agree 100%. I use Apple cause of their security and Touch ID is an integral part of it.
Now if they are locking phones for a screen replacement, that's going too far.
dasaint
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2002
- Messages
- 1,715
Eh good thing i dont do apple.. i also do not use the touch id type features in android either... Police can Enforce ppl to use their fingerprint to unlock a phone they cannot enforce you to put in a pin or password as thats knowledge...
TINFOIL HATS ALL AROUND!!!
TINFOIL HATS ALL AROUND!!!
There's a DIY way too: set the date to January 1, 1970
Setting the date to 1 January 1970 will brick your iPhone, iPad or iPod touch
Time to go to the Apple Store.
Setting the date to 1 January 1970 will brick your iPhone, iPad or iPod touch
Time to go to the Apple Store.
On the contrary, that's *exactly* what I want to happen to my phone if it's stolen and the TouchID is replaced with one embedded with malicious code that could otherwise allow anyone unauthorized access to my data.
I have a feeling that you haven't read the pages of terms and conditions given to you with your new iPhone that you subsequently signed after merely skimming for the signature line.
I'm glad you've got an Apple Store to hand and can afford their charges. I'm glad you're confident that that will always be the case.
So what happens with Galaxy Note 5 and above devices with Samsung Pay and stuff. Do their sensors function after a aftermarket screen and home button replacement or are they errored out?
The key to this issue is simple, and will be proven in court by the following. If you get a screen replacement done at a third party, and you get a error. Can that error be simply removed by going to an A Store or is the only fix by removing the part. If they simply do a soft unblock, then that means Apple devices do not require specific parts and thus materially they are the same. If however the only fix is to not only update a device database within Apple and their pay associated vendors, then no way will a court side with anyone but Apple.
The key to this issue is simple, and will be proven in court by the following. If you get a screen replacement done at a third party, and you get a error. Can that error be simply removed by going to an A Store or is the only fix by removing the part. If they simply do a soft unblock, then that means Apple devices do not require specific parts and thus materially they are the same. If however the only fix is to not only update a device database within Apple and their pay associated vendors, then no way will a court side with anyone but Apple.
It's a sensor, ehat code?
How would they unlock your device?
Why do you have sensitive data on a phone?
Sensitive data is what phones these advertise as their go to feature. Collect, use and resell is the idea of a smartphone data