34 ms·

Apple Apologizes and Updates iOS to Restore iPhones Disabled by Error 53

400 points by aj_icracked 11y ago

illumin8 11y ago
This seems like the right thing to do - disable the unauthorized Touch ID sensor, but don't brick the phone. The secure enclave is still intact and secure, and if you want Touch ID back, you can get it repaired with authorized parts.
- mtgx 11y ago
  Well, apparently the "Secure" Enclave isn't quite that secure, and its firmware can be modified, even remotely: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160218/10371233643/yes-backdoor-that-fbi-is-requesting-can-work-modern-iphones-too.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160218/10371233643/yes-b...
  - sp332 11y ago
    It is secure. You can't get the keys out even with modified firmware.
    - kinofcain 11y ago
      But if I can update the firmware to make it easier to brute-force the pin, that's bad. Previously there was speculation that a firmware update to the secure enclave would wipe the contents of the secure enclave. If that's not the case, then the whole design of a simple pin combined with a complex device id to form a secure key is not as strong as was thought. Basically, everyone should now use an alphanumeric password on their phones and not rely on the 10-tries limit or on the exponentially increasing delays.
      - nathancahill 11y ago
        Sounds like you know something the FBI is missing in the San Bernadino case! Definitely shoot them an email about how updating the firmware makes it easier to brute-force the pin.
        feld 11y ago
        These internet/armchair secure enclave experts are starting to ruin every conversation
        seanp2k2 11y ago
        I trust that comex knows what he's talking about : http://www.ijailbreak.com/developers/ http://www.ijailbreak.com/developers/
        feld 11y ago
        I will require more specific details of the iPhone 5/5C architecture to confirm this is true. Schematics, Apple documents, etc would be nice.
        gpm 11y ago
        The FBI is currently trying to force Apple to produce the modified firmware he is talking about. I'm not sure why you think he is suggesting he knows more than them.
        mikeash 11y ago
        Discussion of the Secure Enclave has no bearing on the practicality of the FBI's request. The iPhone the FBI is asking Apple to break into is an older model that doesn't have a Secure Enclave. It's pretty well accepted at this point that Apple is capable of complying with the FBI's request. The big question is whether Apple would be capable of complying with a similar request with a newer iPhone that includes a Secure Enclave.
      - feld 11y ago
        The iPhone 5/5C does not have a secure enclave. That was a feature of the A7 chip in the 5S and newer. This is how it's possible for Apple to modify the phone's firmware without wiping the phone. I suspect that the iPhone 5/5C and older's encryption key was stored on a regular flash chip somewhere. edit: the "firmware" update is an iOS update that removes the software limitation. SOFTWARE LIMITATION. On newer iPhones it's hardware (secure enclave). Yes, you can do an firmware update on an encrypted iPhone. It's not full disk encryption. Only user data is encrypted.
        comex 11y ago
        This is incorrect - the Secure Enclave is a separate CPU, but the rate limiter is still software, and its firmware can (currently) be updated without erasing keys: http://blog.trailofbits.com/2016/02/17/apple-can-comply-with-the-fbi-court-order/ http://blog.trailofbits.com/2016/02/17/apple-can-comply-with...
      - nemothekid 11y ago
        The phone in the San Bernardino case is an iPhone 5C which does not have a Secure Enclave. The Secure Enclave (in the iPhone 5S and iPhone 6) has a hardware enforced rate limiter that cannot be overridden by a firmware update.
        comex 11y ago
        This is incorrect - the Secure Enclave is a separate CPU, but the rate limiter is still software, and its firmware can (currently) be updated without erasing keys: http://blog.trailofbits.com/2016/02/17/apple-can-comply-with-the-fbi-court-order/ http://blog.trailofbits.com/2016/02/17/apple-can-comply-with...
        threeseed 11y ago
        The rate limiter is in software but that doesn't mean the total number of attempts is in software. Or that there isn't a minimum rate set in hardware. All we know is that Apple at some point increased the delay. Doesn't mean they can decrease it.
        sjwright 11y ago
        This article seems to be largely unsubstantiated speculation. I see no evidence that a locked secure enclave can have its firmware updated.
        mikeash 11y ago
        Where is the evidence that the Secure Enclave's software can be updated without erasing keys? The article states: "Apple can update the SE firmware, it does not require the phone passcode, and it does not wipe user data on update." But it does not support this statement in any way. In my experience, it does either require the phone passcode, or it wipes the data. Of course, I have no idea where that requirement is implemented. It would be easy and sensible to have the secure enclave require the passcode for an update to its own firmware, or erase the keys it holds when applying such an update without the passcode. Apple doesn't say they do it from what I can tell, but it would fit with everything else they do, it's pretty easy to do, and I've seen no indication that it doesn't do this.
      - metric10 11y ago
        Assuming you are referring to the San Bernardino case, that is an iPhone 5c which features an A6 series CPU. The Secure Enclave feature was introduced with the A7 [1]. [1] https://www.apple.com/business/docs/iOS_Security_Guide.pdf https://www.apple.com/business/docs/iOS_Security_Guide.pdf (page 5)
        tlrobinson 11y ago
        The point is, it was speculated that if the phone had a Secure Enclave it would be impossible for Apple to meet the FBI's request, but it appears that even Secure Enclave phones are vulnerable.
        threeseed 11y ago
        > but it appears that even Secure Enclave phones are vulnerable What proof is there of this ? Even reports I've heard from people at the White House believe the newer phones are simply not possible for Apple to compromise.
        metric10 11y ago
        This appears to be true. If you look at Page 5 of [1], there's a side note about DFU mode. There's no indication that updating the firmware wipes the secure contents of the device, which it would need to in order to be secure: """ Entering Device Firmware Upgrade (DFU) mode Restoring a device after it enters DFU mode returns it to known good state with the certainty that only unmodified Apple-signed code is present. DFU mode can be entered manually: First connect the device to a computer using a USB cable, then hold down both the Home and Sleep/Wake buttons. After 8 seconds, release the Sleep/Wake button while continuing to hold down the Home button. Note: Nothing will be displayed on the screen when the device is in DFU mode. If the Apple logo appears, the Sleep/Wake button was held down too long. """ [1] https://www.apple.com/business/docs/iOS_Security_Guide.pdf https://www.apple.com/business/docs/iOS_Security_Guide.pdf
        acdha 11y ago
      - deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
      - givinguflac 11y ago
        You CANNOT update the firmware on the secure enclave. You don't understand how it works obviously.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
  - fla 11y ago
    This article answers most technical questions and goes into great details http://blog.trailofbits.com/2016/02/17/apple-can-comply-with-the-fbi-court-order/ http://blog.trailofbits.com/2016/02/17/apple-can-comply-with...
    - threeseed 11y ago
      That article is pure speculation and is pretty much worthless. It's claim that the Secure Enclave is comprimisable is based on Apple releasing a firmware update that "increased delays between passcode attempts". From this the author then assumes that Apple then has the ability to "disable passcode delays and auto erase". There is no evidence for this. And there are plenty of other scenarios like their being a hardware minimum attempt delay, auto erase not being possible or the maximum attempt count implemented in hardware.
- chinathrow 11y ago
  The car industry played the same game a while a go and failed badly. Allow repairs of the device you OWN with parts you decide and not the manufacturer.
  - stouset 11y ago
    This is equivalent to allowing any party in control of your device to circumvent its security by installing a fake fingerprint sensor. No thank you.
    - chinathrow 11y ago
      Even if it's fake, it should simply transmit fingerprint data to the CPU and not more. What am I missing here?
      - smileysteve 11y ago
        The possibility of a skimmer or data modifier. Ie, I add a logger to your sensor, get all of your data, then make a sensor that translates my fingerprint to look like your fingerprint (or just always sends your fingerprint)
        chinathrow 11y ago
        Why the need for a logger/skimmer? Touch ID has been proven to be vulnerable to fingerprint clones for years. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HM8b8d8kSNQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HM8b8d8kSNQ Edit: Yes, not broken but also not 100% secure.
        evan_ 11y ago
        Why make it easier?
        chinathrow 11y ago
        It _is_ easy if you have the fingerprint of someone.
- rustynails 11y ago
  This is not Apple's policy (as they informed me). Once a device has been compromised in any way, they will no longer touch it. If you want it repaired, you either go through a 3rd party repairer or you get it replaced under insurance. Also, Apple don't sell Authorised parts and I could not find anyone that provided genuine OEM parts.
  - ericabiz 11y ago
    You are correct that Apple does not sell parts--and thus "genuine OEM parts" do not exist outside of an Apple store. That being said, most highly-rated third-party repair shops use high-quality screens that are pretty much indistinguishable from your original Apple screen. Check reviews and ratings of any third-party store before you get your phone repaired. There are great ones and there are terrible ones, just like with any service business. And if anyone from any store tells you they buy iPhone screens from Apple, or that they do use "genuine OEM parts", now you know--they are lying.
    - commandar 11y ago
      My understanding is that this is more of a software issue: only Apple and authorized service providers are able to pair a particular TouchID sensor with a device.
      - ericabiz 11y ago
        The only "authorized service provider" for iPhone screen and home button issues is the Apple Store. Apple doesn't license or sell parts to anyone else for iPhone screen repairs. If you get your home button repaired by a third party, now, Touch ID simply won't work. Seems reasonable considering home button issues that would require repair are relatively rare--phones with destroyed home buttons are usually in such bad shape that the owner is just glad to get a working phone back, never mind the Touch ID. Apple Stores usually won't work on phones with bent frames, severe water damage, etc. anyway--they'll just try to sell you a new (refurbished) phone. Third party repair stores will attempt the repair and can often fix the phone, resulting in a happy customer who gets a cheaper repair and gets to keep the data on their phone.
- rasz_pl 11y ago
  Can you ? Apple doesnt repair, they swap. They will most likely give you another refurbished phone.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
aj_icracked 11y ago
I am a little torn on this given there isn't a cited source and I don't know if Apple would give TC (or anyone) an exclusive on this. If it's true we're dancing in the streets though!
- tehwebguy 11y ago
  > Update: A new support document on Apple’s site has been issued that details the causes and repair methods for Error 53. Links to https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT205628 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT205628
  - wfunction 11y ago
    Last Modified: Dec 21, 2015?
    - mikeash 11y ago
      It shows "Feb 18, 2016" for me. Maybe something was momentarily out of sync somehow.
      - stordoff 11y ago
        I'm also seeing "Last modified: Dec 21, 2015", as is the Google Cache of the page and the Web Archive. I'd assume it was published with the wrong date, and the correction hasn't fully propagated Apple's CDN/cache.
wfunction 11y ago
Who actually buys the explanation that this was not intended to leave the factory?
- exw 11y ago
  Anybody with common sense. Do you really think that Apple, who prides themselves on having outstanding customer satisfaction, would deliberately try to brick their customers phones through something this obvious? Apple definitely looks out of their own interests, but they jump through a lot of hoops to protect their customers from bad experiences, especially since the obvious implementation was to just disable the fingerprint sensor if can't be trusted. Edit: additional info from the TC article: <<The update is not for users who update their iPhones over the air (OTA) via iCloud. If you update your phone that way, you should never have encountered Error 53 in the first place.>> Your conspiracy theory would really require that they brick phones through both the OTA and iTunes update.
  - wfunction 11y ago
    > Do you really think that Apple, who prides themselves on having outstanding customer satisfaction, would deliberately try to brick their customers phones through something this obvious? Yes I do think that they would attempt to discourage unauthorized repairs in such a way for less-than-noble reasons. If you think it was a mistake, then can you explain why Apple wasn't bothered to do anything until someone ran an article on it and publicized it?
    - mmmBacon 11y ago
      > Yes I do think that they would attempt to discourage unauthorized repairs in such a way for less-than-noble reasons. Repairs are not really a revenue stream. Apple Care is a revenue stream but the incentive is to not repair. Since every repair logged against Apple Care is a cost, it doesn't make sense that Apple would want to do this themselves from a purely economic perspective. I've been in HW all my working life. Any field return is expensive and resource intensive to handle and you cannot pass all those costs onto your customers. You do it to provide good service to your customers. You eat the repair cost as part of internal warranty cost which is built into the pricing of every unit sold. What you are saying just doesn't make sense to me. As a user I don't want any yahoo being able to replace my touch ID sensor. I have tons of sensitive information on my phone. I want that thing disabled if touch ID breaks or has been tampered with. >If you think it was a mistake, then can you explain why Apple wasn't bothered to do anything until someone ran an article on it and publicized it? How do you know that they didn't "bother to do anything" on this issue until someone ran an article?
roddux 11y ago
Nice move, it's pretty cool of them to offer reimbursement to people who bought replacement phones in the meantime.
- deckar01 11y ago
  So, anyone who dropped the cash to buy a new iPhone gets it for free (with a working touch ID sensor), but anyone who couldn't afford to buy a new iPhone has to pay for an official touch ID sensor? Ouch.
  - rconti 11y ago
    To be fair, I'm not sure a new touchID sensor is expensive. I cracked the screen on my 6 the other day, and was investigating DIY screen replacements. $100 for screen+digitizer not so bad, but I hear the replacement is a bit of a bear. Fortunately a friend overheard my conversation and recommended I just take it to Apple. Sure enough, screen replacements are something like $105 out the door. The replace the screen and digitizer. When I went back for my phone, they told me they tried 2 new screens+digitizers and neither one worked, so they just gave me a new phone for the "screen replacement" price. Needless to say, I was quite happy I didn't try to DIY. I had no idea the "official" Apple repairs would be so cheap. I guess things have gotten a lot more consumer friendly since the bad PR days of cracked screens. I'm not sure if the home button is replaced in a screen replacement, but I can't imagine it's particularly expensive vs a screen+digitizer replacement.
    - zimpenfish 11y ago
      I managed to get an almost invisible hairline crack in my screen - could only really see it with the right angle. Made a genius bar appointment then sat around for an hour waiting whilst they were swamped. A nice lady appeared, looked at the screen, was impressed how subtle the crack was, and then gave me a new phone rather than fixing the screen because they'd kept me hanging around for an hour. Compared with every other customer service experience I've had, this is gold standard and means I'll almost certainly keep buying Apple kit (although my current battery issues aren't being handled as effectively, mind.)
maerF0x0 11y ago
Anyone else find it suspicious that this comes the day after court order to backdoor their devices?
- hyperpape 11y ago
  Not me (seriously...it's an odd coincidence, but I don't see the connection.)
- qubex 11y ago
  I admit to being so cynical that this was the first thought that passed through my head, too — and I dismissed it as being paranoid... yeah but... some things just rub you up the wrong way, don't they?
- emersonrsantos 11y ago
  Update is only for bricked phones, so no.
hackaflocka 11y ago
But wait, they earlier said it was an intended security feature. Now they're saying that it was a factory test not intended to go public? New personal rule: never update the phone again... ever.
- joshstrange 11y ago
  It is a security feature that your TouchID is disabled when the phone detects a non-official/verified sensor but it wasn't intended to brick the phone, just disabled TouchID. There was a bug that ONLY affected people who update using iTunes (this is rarer than you might think) as it's a diagnostics tool they use in factories where they WANT to get the error 53, they didn't intend that to get out to customers.
mbrd 11y ago
Anyone else get the impression that the head of PR at Apple was on vacation and returned this week to put out all the fires? Seriously though, this seems like a consumer-friendly decisions, as was the iOS backdoor/San Bernadino press release yesterday and it's nice to see.
baldfat 11y ago
> Apple Apologies I am an Apple hater BUT I have to say very proud of the new Apple and actually saying they made a mistake and apologizes. This and the fight for security are both things as a self proclaimed Apple Hater applaud Apple for doing. Good job!
- cptskippy 11y ago
  With the amount of publicity that Apple gets, it would be silly for them to not properly address this issue in a way that both furthers their current pro privacy stance but also caters to their customers.
- thefrog 11y ago
  Any time I hear the term "Apple hater" with no justification or reasoning, I can't help but think that person is of the lowest intelligence. (Or Android hater, or any other tech "hater" for that matter. Why can't we accept that companies do different things without proclaiming ourselves as "haters"?)
  - baldfat 11y ago
    I'm the hater: I thought they were givens when dealing with "Apple Haters" I can go off the top of my head! Original Mac replaced the over $10,000 Lisa for a quarter of the price then left the color option off the market for over a year. (My dad was buying the first Mac when the color one comes out ended up with an Amiga). Amgia: Apple lied about the capabilities of the Amiga. My Amiga 1000 at 7.16 MHz could run an emulator of the MacOS at 7.8336 MHz BOTH on the same 68000 CPU and the Amiga out preformed it in benchmarks. The Mac took many years to catch up to the Amiga. Amiga had analogue colors and Mac had a extremely limited range of colors that were digital. You ever have to service the old Apple Printers? WOW they were HORRIBLE! Even worse did you ever have to work with Token Rings?!?!?! I will never be able to read Lord of the Rings without going into a rage about the 1990s networking with these beauts! The "Pro-Tools" era of Digital audio. Even after the need for proprietary hardware for I/O was over (1998 or so) they continued to sell many many thousands of dollars inputs based on false information provided by Apple. Lies: No malware or virus. No crashes. - No OS is safe (They even use to suggest that people have an anti-virus program running on OS X on their website) Still today OS X and Apple software crashes all the time on me. Just Sunday a mission critical part of the presentation refused to work till after a hard reboot and re-install of the software. Litigation as a tool to stop competition. Present Day: Price Fixing which breaks down the rights of the buyer to have the power and knowledge in purchasing (This is why it is illegag. Walled garden - I'm an old school Hacker who prefer Linux and open hardware. Macs life span is so short presently. Apple doesn't even tell you what the life span of their OS releases will be (Unless that changed recently) 30% commission on apps, books and well everyone's work. This causes Apple (Google also guilty of this) to make more off of people's work then the creators do. This is part of the reason why we had the EBook price fixing issue. OS X and Apple Software UI is very limiting and causes me to go mad trying to remember what the "Apple Way" is. My biggest pet peeve is Final Cut does not have a Render for the longest time. I had to always go search for the way to just pre-render and final render video projects to export. This made me look silly BUT Final Cut added render as an actual term a few years ago. Render was the technical word for all video editing EXCEPT Final Cut! I could go on for much more and I am sure you disagree with all of it, but to say someone disagrees with something you prefer as being unintelligent just means you have your own bias that allow you to believe you are smarter due to your preferences.
jsudhams 11y ago
Does apple make lot of money or loose lot of money on repairs? Or else they should let third party repairs.Typically for product companies it is better if they have ECO system of repairs/service by third party so that they them selves don't have to support for long which costs lot of money. Other than life safety devices others should allow customer who want to repair their product should be allowed.
- rconti 11y ago
  I made another comment, but screen+digitizer replacement for my 6 cost $105. Not bad at all IMO. The parts alone cost $100 online.
  - ericabiz 11y ago
    The part cost wholesale (ordering 100+ of them at a time) is $74-$78 currently for a high quality LCD+digitizer for an iPhone 6. Note that Apple doesn't sell parts directly, and any third-party repair store that says differently is lying to you. There are, however, plenty of high-quality replacement parts available from other distributors.
- seanp2k2 11y ago
  Apple is great at manufacturing and logistics though, so the parts are probably pretty cheap for them even though they're also good quality (well, likely better than you'd find in the aftermarket or on eBay). The repairs they do are fairly simple, so combined with their ability to control the experience and make sure it doesn't suck for consumers helping their brand, it's another revenue channel for them. Edit: even if they're losing money on every repair, it might be worth it to them to give people the peace of mind of knowing that they can "take it back to where they got it" to have it fixed if anything bad happens. That's not a common thing with electronics these days.
- cooper12 11y ago
  Repairs are part of the Apple ecosystem, hence the whole "Genius Bar" thing. Apple wants to control the whole experience from purchase onwards. And let me tell you, they treat you very well. When I was under warranty they always tracked down my issue and even found things I didn't notice like my trackpad going bad. Apple does have licensed third party repairers. People also use unlicensed repairers and repair their own devices all the time such as with screens. The situation here was that unlicensed parts were a security risk and their factory tests were left in which bricked the devices. Now TouchID is just disabled.
chris_wot 11y ago
Yes, well, it probably helps to know that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commisioon (ACCC) was investigating Apple for abuse of market power over this issue. The last time this occurred, it was over illegally claiming iPhones and other Apple devices were out of warranty when they weren't, and misleading consumers that to get any form of warranty service after one year they would need to purchase an Apple extended warranty. They were not only fined millions, but were forced into printing a humiliating retraction on their website and in the press - one that basically was reported on worldwide. I'm not at all surprised they backed down this quickly this time around. It's almost certain they would have been found to have committed the offence of third line forcing, to which there are very, very steep fines.
gradients 11y ago
Wow- this is great for me. I have been sitting on iOS8 for some time now because of this. I broke my screen and home button and had them replaced before I went on vacation. Luckily I had read about the error 53 issue before attempting to upgrade my jailbroken device. I'm very surprised Apple would respond so well to an issue typically caused by 3rd party repairs.
- Ezhik 11y ago
  Apparently OTA updates don't suffer from this, so you could try soft-restoring your device (there's a Cydia tweak for that), then doing the OTA update to 9.x.
profeta 11y ago
So they pleased users and complied with that judge order in one bat? ;)
dismal2 11y ago
If you have a smartphone and think you have any sort of privacy, you're delusional
TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
> This test was designed to check whether Touch ID works properly before the device leaves the factory. Does that mean Error 53 stemmed from Apple having distrust in their supply chain? Interesting.
- jonknee 11y ago
  Not a bad tack considering where the iPhone is made.
  - TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
    It's a reasonable precaution no matter where it might be made. You never know who might alter the device in transit.
CountSessine 11y ago
Maybe this is a silly question, but does anyone know how secure the TouchID on the iPhone is compared to the 4 digit pin? I remember from a comment in the Android source that the android 5 face recognition is about equivalent to a 3 digit pin. Is TouchID more secure or less secure than the 4 digit pin? Is it more tractable or less tractable for someone to brute-force the 4 digit pin than the TouchID? I.e. if someone wanted to get into my phone, and they removed the official TouchID sensor and now it falls back on a 4 digit pin, does that do them any good? I wonder if I could get the old behaviour back - if someone was tampering with my phone by removing the sensor, is there any way of bricking the phone until I can get it to an apple store?
- spacehome 11y ago
  The problem with TouchID against even a moderately sophisticated attacker is that you leave fingerprints everywhere, including, say, on the phone itself.
  - CountSessine 11y ago
    :-) I remember an episode of macgyver where macgyver gets past a handprint scanner by sprinkling baking soda over it; it adhered to the oil left on the scanner by the previous user and he got in.
- HappyTypist 11y ago
  FYI, it's slightly difficult to brute force the touch ID, because the secure enclave will wipe the derived PIN key (that it holds in internal memory, after receiving a signed message from the touch id sensor) in a reboot or after 48 hours.
  - MBCook 11y ago
    Or a certain number of incorrect attempts.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
jasonjei 11y ago
Some part of me believes that the old Apple that Steve Jobs was in control would have stood his ground with "Error 53." The Tim Cook Apple is a lot more compassionate with respect to these sort of things.
- ratfacemcgee 11y ago
  i used to work as a genius, and left a few years back. When i left, the genius role basically became 60-70% display replacements for iphones, and no macs at all. When you get a display replaced, the phone goes through 2 machines, one of which calibrates the phone by launching some weird firmware while in the machine (actually kinda neat, its like a DFU mode but it doesn't wipe the phone in the process) Since every phone has to run through the machine, it creates a backlog of phones that are waiting. These phones work without being put through the machine, but sometimes the displays are fucked and the machine detects that (and the phone then gets a new display, etc etc). The machine also pairs the display with the phone, so that Applecare have a record of what display is currently on what phone. If you take your phone in again, they do a spot check to make sure that display matches and they're good to go. If it doesn't, then they're supposed to refuse service (cause its likely that it was done at a dodgy repairer). HOWEVER! I've seen phones get stuck in weird loops as soon as they're restarted if they haven't been put through the machine yet. The phone basically is fucked at that point and needs replacement. Remember, this is a legit repair that has caused this, and happens way more than you think (maybe 1 in 20 when i left, its probably better now). Therefore, they are probably taking this route because they can't be sure that they aren't the cause of the fuckups.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
iBzOtaku 11y ago
Boy, lately things haven't been going well for Apple.

400 points by aj_icracked 11y ago

This seems like the right thing to do - disable the unauthorized Touch ID sensor, but don't brick the phone. The secure enclave is still intact and secure, and if you want Touch ID back, you can get it repaired with authorized parts.

mtgx 11y ago
Well, apparently the "Secure" Enclave isn't quite that secure, and its firmware can be modified, even remotely: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160218/10371233643/yes-backdoor-that-fbi-is-requesting-can-work-modern-iphones-too.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160218/10371233643/yes-b...
- sp332 11y ago
  It is secure. You can't get the keys out even with modified firmware.
  - kinofcain 11y ago
    But if I can update the firmware to make it easier to brute-force the pin, that's bad. Previously there was speculation that a firmware update to the secure enclave would wipe the contents of the secure enclave. If that's not the case, then the whole design of a simple pin combined with a complex device id to form a secure key is not as strong as was thought. Basically, everyone should now use an alphanumeric password on their phones and not rely on the 10-tries limit or on the exponentially increasing delays.
    - nathancahill 11y ago
      Sounds like you know something the FBI is missing in the San Bernadino case! Definitely shoot them an email about how updating the firmware makes it easier to brute-force the pin.
      - feld 11y ago
        These internet/armchair secure enclave experts are starting to ruin every conversation
        seanp2k2 11y ago
        I trust that comex knows what he's talking about : http://www.ijailbreak.com/developers/ http://www.ijailbreak.com/developers/
        feld 11y ago
        I will require more specific details of the iPhone 5/5C architecture to confirm this is true. Schematics, Apple documents, etc would be nice.
      - gpm 11y ago
        The FBI is currently trying to force Apple to produce the modified firmware he is talking about. I'm not sure why you think he is suggesting he knows more than them.
      - mikeash 11y ago
        Discussion of the Secure Enclave has no bearing on the practicality of the FBI's request. The iPhone the FBI is asking Apple to break into is an older model that doesn't have a Secure Enclave. It's pretty well accepted at this point that Apple is capable of complying with the FBI's request. The big question is whether Apple would be capable of complying with a similar request with a newer iPhone that includes a Secure Enclave.
    - feld 11y ago
      The iPhone 5/5C does not have a secure enclave. That was a feature of the A7 chip in the 5S and newer. This is how it's possible for Apple to modify the phone's firmware without wiping the phone. I suspect that the iPhone 5/5C and older's encryption key was stored on a regular flash chip somewhere. edit: the "firmware" update is an iOS update that removes the software limitation. SOFTWARE LIMITATION. On newer iPhones it's hardware (secure enclave). Yes, you can do an firmware update on an encrypted iPhone. It's not full disk encryption. Only user data is encrypted.
      - comex 11y ago
        This is incorrect - the Secure Enclave is a separate CPU, but the rate limiter is still software, and its firmware can (currently) be updated without erasing keys: http://blog.trailofbits.com/2016/02/17/apple-can-comply-with-the-fbi-court-order/ http://blog.trailofbits.com/2016/02/17/apple-can-comply-with...
    - nemothekid 11y ago
      The phone in the San Bernardino case is an iPhone 5C which does not have a Secure Enclave. The Secure Enclave (in the iPhone 5S and iPhone 6) has a hardware enforced rate limiter that cannot be overridden by a firmware update.
      - comex 11y ago
        This is incorrect - the Secure Enclave is a separate CPU, but the rate limiter is still software, and its firmware can (currently) be updated without erasing keys: http://blog.trailofbits.com/2016/02/17/apple-can-comply-with-the-fbi-court-order/ http://blog.trailofbits.com/2016/02/17/apple-can-comply-with...
        threeseed 11y ago
        The rate limiter is in software but that doesn't mean the total number of attempts is in software. Or that there isn't a minimum rate set in hardware. All we know is that Apple at some point increased the delay. Doesn't mean they can decrease it.
        sjwright 11y ago
        This article seems to be largely unsubstantiated speculation. I see no evidence that a locked secure enclave can have its firmware updated.
        mikeash 11y ago
        Where is the evidence that the Secure Enclave's software can be updated without erasing keys? The article states: "Apple can update the SE firmware, it does not require the phone passcode, and it does not wipe user data on update." But it does not support this statement in any way. In my experience, it does either require the phone passcode, or it wipes the data. Of course, I have no idea where that requirement is implemented. It would be easy and sensible to have the secure enclave require the passcode for an update to its own firmware, or erase the keys it holds when applying such an update without the passcode. Apple doesn't say they do it from what I can tell, but it would fit with everything else they do, it's pretty easy to do, and I've seen no indication that it doesn't do this.
    - metric10 11y ago
      Assuming you are referring to the San Bernardino case, that is an iPhone 5c which features an A6 series CPU. The Secure Enclave feature was introduced with the A7 [1]. [1] https://www.apple.com/business/docs/iOS_Security_Guide.pdf https://www.apple.com/business/docs/iOS_Security_Guide.pdf (page 5)
      - tlrobinson 11y ago
        The point is, it was speculated that if the phone had a Secure Enclave it would be impossible for Apple to meet the FBI's request, but it appears that even Secure Enclave phones are vulnerable.
        threeseed 11y ago
        > but it appears that even Secure Enclave phones are vulnerable What proof is there of this ? Even reports I've heard from people at the White House believe the newer phones are simply not possible for Apple to compromise.
        metric10 11y ago
        This appears to be true. If you look at Page 5 of [1], there's a side note about DFU mode. There's no indication that updating the firmware wipes the secure contents of the device, which it would need to in order to be secure: """ Entering Device Firmware Upgrade (DFU) mode Restoring a device after it enters DFU mode returns it to known good state with the certainty that only unmodified Apple-signed code is present. DFU mode can be entered manually: First connect the device to a computer using a USB cable, then hold down both the Home and Sleep/Wake buttons. After 8 seconds, release the Sleep/Wake button while continuing to hold down the Home button. Note: Nothing will be displayed on the screen when the device is in DFU mode. If the Apple logo appears, the Sleep/Wake button was held down too long. """ [1] https://www.apple.com/business/docs/iOS_Security_Guide.pdf https://www.apple.com/business/docs/iOS_Security_Guide.pdf
        acdha 11y ago
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
    - givinguflac 11y ago
      You CANNOT update the firmware on the secure enclave. You don't understand how it works obviously.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- fla 11y ago
  This article answers most technical questions and goes into great details http://blog.trailofbits.com/2016/02/17/apple-can-comply-with-the-fbi-court-order/ http://blog.trailofbits.com/2016/02/17/apple-can-comply-with...
  - threeseed 11y ago
    That article is pure speculation and is pretty much worthless. It's claim that the Secure Enclave is comprimisable is based on Apple releasing a firmware update that "increased delays between passcode attempts". From this the author then assumes that Apple then has the ability to "disable passcode delays and auto erase". There is no evidence for this. And there are plenty of other scenarios like their being a hardware minimum attempt delay, auto erase not being possible or the maximum attempt count implemented in hardware.
chinathrow 11y ago
The car industry played the same game a while a go and failed badly. Allow repairs of the device you OWN with parts you decide and not the manufacturer.
- stouset 11y ago
  This is equivalent to allowing any party in control of your device to circumvent its security by installing a fake fingerprint sensor. No thank you.
  - chinathrow 11y ago
    Even if it's fake, it should simply transmit fingerprint data to the CPU and not more. What am I missing here?
    - smileysteve 11y ago
      The possibility of a skimmer or data modifier. Ie, I add a logger to your sensor, get all of your data, then make a sensor that translates my fingerprint to look like your fingerprint (or just always sends your fingerprint)
      - chinathrow 11y ago
        Why the need for a logger/skimmer? Touch ID has been proven to be vulnerable to fingerprint clones for years. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HM8b8d8kSNQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HM8b8d8kSNQ Edit: Yes, not broken but also not 100% secure.
        evan_ 11y ago
        Why make it easier?
        chinathrow 11y ago
        It _is_ easy if you have the fingerprint of someone.
rustynails 11y ago
This is not Apple's policy (as they informed me). Once a device has been compromised in any way, they will no longer touch it. If you want it repaired, you either go through a 3rd party repairer or you get it replaced under insurance. Also, Apple don't sell Authorised parts and I could not find anyone that provided genuine OEM parts.
- ericabiz 11y ago
  You are correct that Apple does not sell parts--and thus "genuine OEM parts" do not exist outside of an Apple store. That being said, most highly-rated third-party repair shops use high-quality screens that are pretty much indistinguishable from your original Apple screen. Check reviews and ratings of any third-party store before you get your phone repaired. There are great ones and there are terrible ones, just like with any service business. And if anyone from any store tells you they buy iPhone screens from Apple, or that they do use "genuine OEM parts", now you know--they are lying.
  - commandar 11y ago
    My understanding is that this is more of a software issue: only Apple and authorized service providers are able to pair a particular TouchID sensor with a device.
    - ericabiz 11y ago
      The only "authorized service provider" for iPhone screen and home button issues is the Apple Store. Apple doesn't license or sell parts to anyone else for iPhone screen repairs. If you get your home button repaired by a third party, now, Touch ID simply won't work. Seems reasonable considering home button issues that would require repair are relatively rare--phones with destroyed home buttons are usually in such bad shape that the owner is just glad to get a working phone back, never mind the Touch ID. Apple Stores usually won't work on phones with bent frames, severe water damage, etc. anyway--they'll just try to sell you a new (refurbished) phone. Third party repair stores will attempt the repair and can often fix the phone, resulting in a happy customer who gets a cheaper repair and gets to keep the data on their phone.
rasz_pl 11y ago
Can you ? Apple doesnt repair, they swap. They will most likely give you another refurbished phone.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

aj_icracked 11y ago

I am a little torn on this given there isn't a cited source and I don't know if Apple would give TC (or anyone) an exclusive on this. If it's true we're dancing in the streets though!

tehwebguy 11y ago
> Update: A new support document on Apple’s site has been issued that details the causes and repair methods for Error 53. Links to https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT205628 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT205628
- wfunction 11y ago
  Last Modified: Dec 21, 2015?
  - mikeash 11y ago
    It shows "Feb 18, 2016" for me. Maybe something was momentarily out of sync somehow.
    - stordoff 11y ago
      I'm also seeing "Last modified: Dec 21, 2015", as is the Google Cache of the page and the Web Archive. I'd assume it was published with the wrong date, and the correction hasn't fully propagated Apple's CDN/cache.

wfunction 11y ago

Who actually buys the explanation that this was not intended to leave the factory?

exw 11y ago
Anybody with common sense. Do you really think that Apple, who prides themselves on having outstanding customer satisfaction, would deliberately try to brick their customers phones through something this obvious? Apple definitely looks out of their own interests, but they jump through a lot of hoops to protect their customers from bad experiences, especially since the obvious implementation was to just disable the fingerprint sensor if can't be trusted. Edit: additional info from the TC article: <<The update is not for users who update their iPhones over the air (OTA) via iCloud. If you update your phone that way, you should never have encountered Error 53 in the first place.>> Your conspiracy theory would really require that they brick phones through both the OTA and iTunes update.
- wfunction 11y ago
  > Do you really think that Apple, who prides themselves on having outstanding customer satisfaction, would deliberately try to brick their customers phones through something this obvious? Yes I do think that they would attempt to discourage unauthorized repairs in such a way for less-than-noble reasons. If you think it was a mistake, then can you explain why Apple wasn't bothered to do anything until someone ran an article on it and publicized it?
  - mmmBacon 11y ago
    > Yes I do think that they would attempt to discourage unauthorized repairs in such a way for less-than-noble reasons. Repairs are not really a revenue stream. Apple Care is a revenue stream but the incentive is to not repair. Since every repair logged against Apple Care is a cost, it doesn't make sense that Apple would want to do this themselves from a purely economic perspective. I've been in HW all my working life. Any field return is expensive and resource intensive to handle and you cannot pass all those costs onto your customers. You do it to provide good service to your customers. You eat the repair cost as part of internal warranty cost which is built into the pricing of every unit sold. What you are saying just doesn't make sense to me. As a user I don't want any yahoo being able to replace my touch ID sensor. I have tons of sensitive information on my phone. I want that thing disabled if touch ID breaks or has been tampered with. >If you think it was a mistake, then can you explain why Apple wasn't bothered to do anything until someone ran an article on it and publicized it? How do you know that they didn't "bother to do anything" on this issue until someone ran an article?

roddux 11y ago

Nice move, it's pretty cool of them to offer reimbursement to people who bought replacement phones in the meantime.

deckar01 11y ago
So, anyone who dropped the cash to buy a new iPhone gets it for free (with a working touch ID sensor), but anyone who couldn't afford to buy a new iPhone has to pay for an official touch ID sensor? Ouch.
- rconti 11y ago
  To be fair, I'm not sure a new touchID sensor is expensive. I cracked the screen on my 6 the other day, and was investigating DIY screen replacements. $100 for screen+digitizer not so bad, but I hear the replacement is a bit of a bear. Fortunately a friend overheard my conversation and recommended I just take it to Apple. Sure enough, screen replacements are something like $105 out the door. The replace the screen and digitizer. When I went back for my phone, they told me they tried 2 new screens+digitizers and neither one worked, so they just gave me a new phone for the "screen replacement" price. Needless to say, I was quite happy I didn't try to DIY. I had no idea the "official" Apple repairs would be so cheap. I guess things have gotten a lot more consumer friendly since the bad PR days of cracked screens. I'm not sure if the home button is replaced in a screen replacement, but I can't imagine it's particularly expensive vs a screen+digitizer replacement.
  - zimpenfish 11y ago
    I managed to get an almost invisible hairline crack in my screen - could only really see it with the right angle. Made a genius bar appointment then sat around for an hour waiting whilst they were swamped. A nice lady appeared, looked at the screen, was impressed how subtle the crack was, and then gave me a new phone rather than fixing the screen because they'd kept me hanging around for an hour. Compared with every other customer service experience I've had, this is gold standard and means I'll almost certainly keep buying Apple kit (although my current battery issues aren't being handled as effectively, mind.)

maerF0x0 11y ago

Anyone else find it suspicious that this comes the day after court order to backdoor their devices?

hyperpape 11y ago
Not me (seriously...it's an odd coincidence, but I don't see the connection.)
qubex 11y ago
I admit to being so cynical that this was the first thought that passed through my head, too — and I dismissed it as being paranoid... yeah but... some things just rub you up the wrong way, don't they?
emersonrsantos 11y ago
Update is only for bricked phones, so no.

hackaflocka 11y ago

But wait, they earlier said it was an intended security feature. Now they're saying that it was a factory test not intended to go public? New personal rule: never update the phone again... ever.

joshstrange 11y ago
It is a security feature that your TouchID is disabled when the phone detects a non-official/verified sensor but it wasn't intended to brick the phone, just disabled TouchID. There was a bug that ONLY affected people who update using iTunes (this is rarer than you might think) as it's a diagnostics tool they use in factories where they WANT to get the error 53, they didn't intend that to get out to customers.

mbrd 11y ago

Anyone else get the impression that the head of PR at Apple was on vacation and returned this week to put out all the fires? Seriously though, this seems like a consumer-friendly decisions, as was the iOS backdoor/San Bernadino press release yesterday and it's nice to see.

baldfat 11y ago

> Apple Apologies I am an Apple hater BUT I have to say very proud of the new Apple and actually saying they made a mistake and apologizes. This and the fight for security are both things as a self proclaimed Apple Hater applaud Apple for doing. Good job!

cptskippy 11y ago
With the amount of publicity that Apple gets, it would be silly for them to not properly address this issue in a way that both furthers their current pro privacy stance but also caters to their customers.
thefrog 11y ago
Any time I hear the term "Apple hater" with no justification or reasoning, I can't help but think that person is of the lowest intelligence. (Or Android hater, or any other tech "hater" for that matter. Why can't we accept that companies do different things without proclaiming ourselves as "haters"?)
- baldfat 11y ago
  I'm the hater: I thought they were givens when dealing with "Apple Haters" I can go off the top of my head! Original Mac replaced the over $10,000 Lisa for a quarter of the price then left the color option off the market for over a year. (My dad was buying the first Mac when the color one comes out ended up with an Amiga). Amgia: Apple lied about the capabilities of the Amiga. My Amiga 1000 at 7.16 MHz could run an emulator of the MacOS at 7.8336 MHz BOTH on the same 68000 CPU and the Amiga out preformed it in benchmarks. The Mac took many years to catch up to the Amiga. Amiga had analogue colors and Mac had a extremely limited range of colors that were digital. You ever have to service the old Apple Printers? WOW they were HORRIBLE! Even worse did you ever have to work with Token Rings?!?!?! I will never be able to read Lord of the Rings without going into a rage about the 1990s networking with these beauts! The "Pro-Tools" era of Digital audio. Even after the need for proprietary hardware for I/O was over (1998 or so) they continued to sell many many thousands of dollars inputs based on false information provided by Apple. Lies: No malware or virus. No crashes. - No OS is safe (They even use to suggest that people have an anti-virus program running on OS X on their website) Still today OS X and Apple software crashes all the time on me. Just Sunday a mission critical part of the presentation refused to work till after a hard reboot and re-install of the software. Litigation as a tool to stop competition. Present Day: Price Fixing which breaks down the rights of the buyer to have the power and knowledge in purchasing (This is why it is illegag. Walled garden - I'm an old school Hacker who prefer Linux and open hardware. Macs life span is so short presently. Apple doesn't even tell you what the life span of their OS releases will be (Unless that changed recently) 30% commission on apps, books and well everyone's work. This causes Apple (Google also guilty of this) to make more off of people's work then the creators do. This is part of the reason why we had the EBook price fixing issue. OS X and Apple Software UI is very limiting and causes me to go mad trying to remember what the "Apple Way" is. My biggest pet peeve is Final Cut does not have a Render for the longest time. I had to always go search for the way to just pre-render and final render video projects to export. This made me look silly BUT Final Cut added render as an actual term a few years ago. Render was the technical word for all video editing EXCEPT Final Cut! I could go on for much more and I am sure you disagree with all of it, but to say someone disagrees with something you prefer as being unintelligent just means you have your own bias that allow you to believe you are smarter due to your preferences.

jsudhams 11y ago

Does apple make lot of money or loose lot of money on repairs? Or else they should let third party repairs.Typically for product companies it is better if they have ECO system of repairs/service by third party so that they them selves don't have to support for long which costs lot of money. Other than life safety devices others should allow customer who want to repair their product should be allowed.

rconti 11y ago
I made another comment, but screen+digitizer replacement for my 6 cost $105. Not bad at all IMO. The parts alone cost $100 online.
- ericabiz 11y ago
  The part cost wholesale (ordering 100+ of them at a time) is $74-$78 currently for a high quality LCD+digitizer for an iPhone 6. Note that Apple doesn't sell parts directly, and any third-party repair store that says differently is lying to you. There are, however, plenty of high-quality replacement parts available from other distributors.
seanp2k2 11y ago
Apple is great at manufacturing and logistics though, so the parts are probably pretty cheap for them even though they're also good quality (well, likely better than you'd find in the aftermarket or on eBay). The repairs they do are fairly simple, so combined with their ability to control the experience and make sure it doesn't suck for consumers helping their brand, it's another revenue channel for them. Edit: even if they're losing money on every repair, it might be worth it to them to give people the peace of mind of knowing that they can "take it back to where they got it" to have it fixed if anything bad happens. That's not a common thing with electronics these days.
cooper12 11y ago
Repairs are part of the Apple ecosystem, hence the whole "Genius Bar" thing. Apple wants to control the whole experience from purchase onwards. And let me tell you, they treat you very well. When I was under warranty they always tracked down my issue and even found things I didn't notice like my trackpad going bad. Apple does have licensed third party repairers. People also use unlicensed repairers and repair their own devices all the time such as with screens. The situation here was that unlicensed parts were a security risk and their factory tests were left in which bricked the devices. Now TouchID is just disabled.

chris_wot 11y ago

Yes, well, it probably helps to know that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commisioon (ACCC) was investigating Apple for abuse of market power over this issue. The last time this occurred, it was over illegally claiming iPhones and other Apple devices were out of warranty when they weren't, and misleading consumers that to get any form of warranty service after one year they would need to purchase an Apple extended warranty. They were not only fined millions, but were forced into printing a humiliating retraction on their website and in the press - one that basically was reported on worldwide. I'm not at all surprised they backed down this quickly this time around. It's almost certain they would have been found to have committed the offence of third line forcing, to which there are very, very steep fines.

gradients 11y ago

Wow- this is great for me. I have been sitting on iOS8 for some time now because of this. I broke my screen and home button and had them replaced before I went on vacation. Luckily I had read about the error 53 issue before attempting to upgrade my jailbroken device. I'm very surprised Apple would respond so well to an issue typically caused by 3rd party repairs.

Ezhik 11y ago
Apparently OTA updates don't suffer from this, so you could try soft-restoring your device (there's a Cydia tweak for that), then doing the OTA update to 9.x.

profeta 11y ago

So they pleased users and complied with that judge order in one bat? ;)

dismal2 11y ago

If you have a smartphone and think you have any sort of privacy, you're delusional

TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago

> This test was designed to check whether Touch ID works properly before the device leaves the factory. Does that mean Error 53 stemmed from Apple having distrust in their supply chain? Interesting.

jonknee 11y ago
Not a bad tack considering where the iPhone is made.
- TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
  It's a reasonable precaution no matter where it might be made. You never know who might alter the device in transit.

CountSessine 11y ago

Maybe this is a silly question, but does anyone know how secure the TouchID on the iPhone is compared to the 4 digit pin? I remember from a comment in the Android source that the android 5 face recognition is about equivalent to a 3 digit pin. Is TouchID more secure or less secure than the 4 digit pin? Is it more tractable or less tractable for someone to brute-force the 4 digit pin than the TouchID? I.e. if someone wanted to get into my phone, and they removed the official TouchID sensor and now it falls back on a 4 digit pin, does that do them any good? I wonder if I could get the old behaviour back - if someone was tampering with my phone by removing the sensor, is there any way of bricking the phone until I can get it to an apple store?

spacehome 11y ago
The problem with TouchID against even a moderately sophisticated attacker is that you leave fingerprints everywhere, including, say, on the phone itself.
- CountSessine 11y ago
  :-) I remember an episode of macgyver where macgyver gets past a handprint scanner by sprinkling baking soda over it; it adhered to the oil left on the scanner by the previous user and he got in.
HappyTypist 11y ago
FYI, it's slightly difficult to brute force the touch ID, because the secure enclave will wipe the derived PIN key (that it holds in internal memory, after receiving a signed message from the touch id sensor) in a reboot or after 48 hours.
- MBCook 11y ago
  Or a certain number of incorrect attempts.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

jasonjei 11y ago

Some part of me believes that the old Apple that Steve Jobs was in control would have stood his ground with "Error 53." The Tim Cook Apple is a lot more compassionate with respect to these sort of things.

ratfacemcgee 11y ago
i used to work as a genius, and left a few years back. When i left, the genius role basically became 60-70% display replacements for iphones, and no macs at all. When you get a display replaced, the phone goes through 2 machines, one of which calibrates the phone by launching some weird firmware while in the machine (actually kinda neat, its like a DFU mode but it doesn't wipe the phone in the process) Since every phone has to run through the machine, it creates a backlog of phones that are waiting. These phones work without being put through the machine, but sometimes the displays are fucked and the machine detects that (and the phone then gets a new display, etc etc). The machine also pairs the display with the phone, so that Applecare have a record of what display is currently on what phone. If you take your phone in again, they do a spot check to make sure that display matches and they're good to go. If it doesn't, then they're supposed to refuse service (cause its likely that it was done at a dodgy repairer). HOWEVER! I've seen phones get stuck in weird loops as soon as they're restarted if they haven't been put through the machine yet. The phone basically is fucked at that point and needs replacement. Remember, this is a legit repair that has caused this, and happens way more than you think (maybe 1 in 20 when i left, its probably better now). Therefore, they are probably taking this route because they can't be sure that they aren't the cause of the fuckups.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

iBzOtaku 11y ago

Boy, lately things haven't been going well for Apple.