Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 30th Aug 2010 22:47 UTC
Apple Since interesting news that I'm actually knowledgeable about is still a little hard to come by, I have to work a little harder. This is something interesting to discuss: John Gruber, rather famous Apple blogger, is now arguing that Apple is in fact not fighting the jailbreaking community. Wait, what?
Order by: Score:
Again & Again
by testman on Mon 30th Aug 2010 22:54 UTC
testman
Member since:
2007-10-15

Keep fighting the good fight, Thom.

Reply Score: 3

v Wait, what?
by mrAmiga500 on Mon 30th Aug 2010 23:01 UTC
Comment by mtzmtulivu
by mtzmtulivu on Mon 30th Aug 2010 23:07 UTC
mtzmtulivu
Member since:
2006-11-14

John Gruber should be seen as an extension of apple's PR machinery. To be suprised or expect him to not spin anything in apple's favor reflects poorly on you.

Any form of discussion with him about anything apple should be done purely for amusement purpose.

Reply Score: 7

RE: Comment by mtzmtulivu
by testman on Mon 30th Aug 2010 23:13 UTC in reply to "Comment by mtzmtulivu"
testman Member since:
2007-10-15

Any form of discussion with him about anything apple(sic) should be done purely for amusement purpose.

Actually, there's a more valid reason: he is very good at predicting trends in Apple's areas of expertise, as well as predicting what Apple are going to do next. His "Claim Chowder" posts and their sources are very interesting to read for a point of comparison.

Edited 2010-08-30 23:20 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by mtzmtulivu
by Manish on Tue 31st Aug 2010 05:00 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by mtzmtulivu"
Manish Member since:
2009-12-18

Actually, there's a more valid reason: he is very good at predicting trends in Apple's areas of expertise, as well as predicting what Apple are going to do next. His "Claim Chowder" posts and their sources are very interesting to read for a point of comparison.


I LOLed at trends. Given his popularity within Apple people, he must be having contacts from Apple PR people. He is afterall an unofficial Apple PR spokesperson who will defend whatever Apple does (even if Steve Jobs shot on your face).

What Apple is going to do next? For Apple it is a very good chance to leak information to Gruber, so that it can be leaked in a controller manner and hype can be built properly.

Reply Score: 5

Why are people so delusional?
by Zifre on Mon 30th Aug 2010 23:10 UTC
Zifre
Member since:
2009-10-04

Why do so many people so easily and willingly delude themselves so much?

Honestly, I really hope that Gruber was joking. Obviously, fixing security vulnerabilities is a good thing, but it's easy to see that Apple does everything they can to prevent jailbreaking.

It's not just Apple fanatics though. People like RMS will tell you that proprietary software is unethical, and that everyone should just start using open source for every purpose. Countless people will argue that climate change and evolution are hoaxes. For every obvious fact, there will be millions of people who ignore the truth and try to push their flawed views onto everyone.

When are people going to wake up?

Reply Score: 4

RE: Why are people so delusional?
by testman on Mon 30th Aug 2010 23:18 UTC in reply to "Why are people so delusional?"
testman Member since:
2007-10-15

When are people going to wake up?

People often cherry-pick facts to support their arguments, knowingly or unknowingly. Don't be so arrogant.

Reply Score: 2

v RE: Why are people so delusional?
by thavith_osn on Tue 31st Aug 2010 00:14 UTC in reply to "Why are people so delusional?"
Voiding the warranty
by WorknMan on Tue 31st Aug 2010 00:48 UTC in reply to "RE: Why are people so delusional?"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

From the article:

Of course, your warranty should void when you jailbreak your phone; this is only natural.


Why? If I buy a new PC, format the hard drive and install whatever I want, should that also void my warranty? And what are smartphones other than pocket-sized PCs?

I wouldn't expect them to support me software-wise if I jailbroke and installed unsupported apps, or if I took iOS off altogether and installed Android, but unless I just completely brick the phone while tinkering with it (user error), shouldn't I still be able to get support if, for example, the home button completely stopped working, or the screen died?

Edited 2010-08-31 00:50 UTC

Reply Score: 7

RE: Voiding the warranty
by umccullough on Tue 31st Aug 2010 01:43 UTC in reply to "Voiding the warranty"
umccullough Member since:
2006-01-26

Why? If I buy a new PC, format the hard drive and install whatever I want, should that also void my warranty? And what are smartphones other than pocket-sized PCs?


The correct analogy in this case would be that you bought a new PC and re-flashed the BIOS with a hacked version.

Say as a result you perhaps bricked the machine, or something went wrong with the overvoltage/overheat protection logic and it caused your mainboard to fry.

I'd say the manufacturer has a pretty good case for voiding your warranty (assuming this was disclosed in the terms).

Most "consumer devices" are not designed to be user-hacked - phones, game consoles, GPS units, etc. generally fall into this category.

On the other hand, your PC is designed (for the most part) to run any suitable OS - there are numerous ways built into the BIOS which allow booting alternative OSes from the start.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Voiding the warranty
by WorknMan on Tue 31st Aug 2010 02:02 UTC in reply to "RE: Voiding the warranty"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

The correct analogy in this case would be that you bought a new PC and re-flashed the BIOS with a hacked version.

Say as a result you perhaps bricked the machine, or something went wrong with the overvoltage/overheat protection logic and it caused your mainboard to fry.

I'd say the manufacturer has a pretty good case for voiding your warranty (assuming this was disclosed in the terms).


Well, you're speaking under the scenario that somebody actually bricked the device while trying to do something it wasn't designed to do, which of course is going to void the warranty ...

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Voiding the warranty
by wmlucas on Tue 31st Aug 2010 02:28 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Voiding the warranty"
wmlucas Member since:
2010-08-31

Why would warranty be an issue unless there are problems with the device? Why should Apple need to diagnose a jailbroken phone to see whether the jailbreak led to the issue?

I haven't followed the saga regarding the Apple's comments about jailbreaking, but the company being against jailbreaking could be interpreted many different ways.

As a developer, I would be happy if the company put an end to App Store piracy. Piracy is a very serious problem here, considering that iPhone developers generally don't use or cannot use serial numbers to verify ownership. Even if the store facilitated this, the App Store is designed around impulsive purchase behaviours, such that serial number requirements would not be tolerated by users.

Personally, I doubt Apple is against using a jailbreak to grant access to SSH, to expose hidden functionality in the system, etc. That said, nobody here know their specific concerns either.

Edited 2010-08-31 02:33 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Voiding the warranty
by bert64 on Tue 31st Aug 2010 08:25 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Voiding the warranty"
bert64 Member since:
2007-04-23

Hardware should be designed such that it cannot be physically damaged by software, and so that whatever state the hardware gets in it's always possible to return it to a default state.
When i first bought an Amiga years ago, the manual showed me how to make a copy of my workbench disks, and then went on to say that there was no way to physically damage the machine regardless of what i did software wise and that absolute worst case, i boot the original workbench disks (which have the readonly tab set) and create a new copy of the disk.

App store "piracy", like any other form of "piracy" is not as cut and dry as people try to make out... Many of the people who download warez copies of apps wouldn't (or couldn't afford to) have bought those apps if they were unable to obtain them for free.

Aside from that, copyright infringement of the software actually increases sales of the hardware and in the case of cellphones might increase the use of the network too. If you spend less on intangibles like software, you have more money to spend on things you can't get for free such as hardware and services.

Serial numbers are pretty worthless, they harm and inconvenience legitimate purchasers, while dodgy serials are widely circulated via warez sites. To give an example, i bought a tomtom gps a few years ago and it came with the device itself, an sd card with the software/maps on and a cd with a backup copy of the software and a serial number printed on the flimsy paper cd wallet. I bought this gps in 2004 or so, and recently needed to reload the software onto it due to damaging the sd card.. I bought a new card, loaded the latest version of the software (Freely downloadable from tomtom), and copied the map on from a backup i made of the old card... It wanted me to activate the map using the serial from the cd case, now i have no idea where this case is, it's 6 years since i purchased the unit and i haven't had to use the cd or its case since so its either lost or been thrown away. Tomtom want me to buy a whole new unit... But why should i?
So i downloaded a keygen and am now again able to use the device i paid good money for.

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: Voiding the warranty
by bogomipz on Tue 31st Aug 2010 14:44 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Voiding the warranty"
bogomipz Member since:
2005-07-11

Hardware should be designed such that it cannot be physically damaged by software, and so that whatever state the hardware gets in it's always possible to return it to a default state.

Well, not being able to hurt the hardware itself is one thing. There is, however, one little other problem with devices containing radio transmitters, such as wireless routers and mobile phones.

The power you are allowed to send with, or the the frequencies that are allowed to send at, may vary from region to region. In such cases, the hardware manufacturer will use a single hardware design, but flash it with different firmwares depending on where the unit is to be sold.

Often, people that flash their wireless routers do it in order to turn up the radio power. Perhaps unknowingly, they might tune it up to a level that is not legal in their country, which could be a bit of a problem. Especially if some people think the manufacturer should be held responsible - then it means that they cannot allow their customers to install third party firmware, and the geeks stop liking the company..

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Voiding the warranty
by mbooth9517 on Tue 31st Aug 2010 15:00 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Voiding the warranty"
mbooth9517 Member since:
2006-07-15

Your first point is the most interesting; that it should not be able to break hardware by the software.

Assume for a minute that a chip can run for a length of time at a certain temperature, but any longer than that its possible to damage the hardware.

Its certainly plausible, and, in my opinion acceptable, to determine this in software, and software which can be flashed.

If its possible to replace this software (which calculates whether the chip is getting close to a dangerous limit) to be replaced, then its an admission that hardware alone can't mitigate all these risks and I reakon its completely fair that replacing this software voids the warrenty.

Whether or not this is the case with apple; I don't know. But just consider that software may be responsible for hardware opperating within its range

Reply Score: 1

samwight Member since:
2010-08-31

"that is why they are currently classified as theories and not laws"

You mean like the kinetic theory of gases? Or the theory of relativity? Or Copernicus's heliocentric theory?

The truth is Newton's *Law* of Gravity is less successful in describing gravity than Einstein's *Theory* of General Relativity.

You can look up scientific "law" and "theory" on wikipedia. Your naive understanding of the terms does not reflect actual usage in science.

Reply Score: 5

AnyoneEB Member since:
2008-10-26

Just so you know, there is no 100% proof of evolution or climate change, both have a lot of holes in them, that is why they are currently classified as theories and not laws (no matter what Carl Sagan said - LOL).

Sorry, this is off-topic and I do not want to start a discussion on climate change, but the "just a theory" line of reasoning always annoys me:
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Scientific_theory
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Scientific_law

Summary: in science, laws are observations and theories are explanations. Really good theories don't become laws, they become established and accepted scientific theories. The theory of evolution explains why we observe evolution. The theory of global warming explains why we see global warming. Of course, if the theory does not match the facts, then it is a bad theory, but an established scientific theory will have experiments and measurements that give reason to believe it is a good model for the way the world works. Science never "proves" anything; it provides evidence that a given explanation seems to work very well.

Reply Score: 5

Icaria Member since:
2010-06-19

Christ, there's always one.

"Just so you know, there is no 100% proof of evolution or climate change"

There's just no reasonable objections and few reasonable objections, respectively.

"both have a lot of holes in them"

Bullshit.

"that is why they are currently classified as theories and not laws (no matter what Carl Sagan said - LOL)."

Sigh.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_law

Theory > law. People really shouldn't pretend to knowledge.

"Creationists and those that argue that there is no climate change (or at least, induced by humans) have a lot of holes in their arguments too."

Understatement. Even mentioning the latter in the same breath as Anthropogenic climate change and evolution, is to afford these kooks more credibility than they're worth. Creationists and (largely) AGW deniers belong to the same clade as astrologists and NWO conspiracy theorists. Placing them on the same pedestal as biologists and climatologists, is to denigrate them and their body of work rather abhorrently.

(Sorry for the OT rant but I can't abide by this kind of vapid nonsense.)

Reply Score: 3

v RE: Why are people so delusional?
by RshPL on Tue 31st Aug 2010 12:04 UTC in reply to "Why are people so delusional?"
Apple is not fighting jailbreaking...
by obsidian on Mon 30th Aug 2010 23:30 UTC
obsidian
Member since:
2007-05-12

... and Elvis didn't have sideburns.

Reply Score: 7

computeruser
Member since:
2009-07-21

Apple could take more technical measures to discourage jailbreaking.
They don't push upgrades to devices. They allow continued use of the App Store and push notifications with older (vulnerable) OS versions and on jailbroken devices. iTunes continues to sync with devices not running the latest available firmware..

Reply Score: 2

mrhasbean Member since:
2006-04-03

Apple could take more technical measures to discourage jailbreaking.
They don't push upgrades to devices. They allow continued use of the App Store and push notifications with older (vulnerable) OS versions and on jailbroken devices. iTunes continues to sync with devices not running the latest available firmware..


Exactly, but as someone said in another comment - people often cherry-pick facts to support their argument so in this article these wouldn't even be a blip on the radar...

Reply Score: 2

dvhh Member since:
2006-03-20

And there are still less "insecure" ways to jailbreak your iPhone.
The PDF exploit was a big hole in the security record that Apple try to keep as clean as possible, and was easily fixable too (update the freetype rendering library).

Reply Score: 3

Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Apple could take more technical measures to discourage jailbreaking.
They don't push upgrades to devices. They allow continued use of the App Store and push notifications with older (vulnerable) OS versions and on jailbroken devices. iTunes continues to sync with devices not running the latest available firmware..

Of course they don't !
1/How could they technically push updates ?
2/What about those that don't have a proper internet connection at home ?
3/What would you think of a brand who forces people to download 30MB regularly over their old internet connection in order to continue to use their product ?

Reply Score: 2

RagaR Member since:
2010-06-22

1/How could they technically push updates ?
2/What about those that don't have a proper internet connection at home ?
3/What would you think of a brand who forces people to download 30MB regularly over their old internet connection in order to continue to use their product ?


I like freedom, I have a Palm Pre. I have UeberKernel installed and that is why I like to decide about updates. Bad thing, Palm don't let choose you. You can say "not yet", but during midnight and with a good connections, it is installed.

It is possible.
It can be done when it is possible to do it.
Smartphones only make sense with a internet flat rate. Who cares?

Reply Score: 1

computeruser Member since:
2009-07-21

1/How could they technically push updates ?

WebOS devices seem to have online updates pushed to them. Android devices seem to have over-the-air updates as well, but I don't know if the updates are ever automatic.

2/What about those that don't have a proper internet connection at home ?

Without an Internet connection, iTunes won't check for updates.

3/What would you think of a brand who forces people to download 30MB regularly over their old internet connection in order to continue to use their product ?

People weren't forced to buy the product in the first place. The set of people who both use insufficient internet connections and buy devices that depend on fast internet connections for much of their functionality is very small.

This is exactly the case for platforms like Xbox Live, which requires frequent software updates to continue using online features.

One way to do this would be to disable syncing with firmware that was old at the time of the latest desktop app release. This would require the user to download the newer version of the desktop app before syncing would be prevented. But they don't do this.

Reply Score: 1

Gotta disagree on one point...
by bhtooefr on Tue 31st Aug 2010 01:16 UTC
bhtooefr
Member since:
2009-02-19

And I'm even a massive Apple hater.

This particular fix, it really was fixing a massive security flaw.

A flaw that allows drive-by download and execution of arbitrary code as root would be considered completely and totally unacceptable in any other OS.

With this one, you could visit a web page that turned out to be a PDF, and it could execute malicious code against your will, and rootkit your phone.

While I do think that Apple should leave a backdoor open for jailbreakers, or better yet, leave the platform mostly open from the beginning, this is not the backdoor to leave, because it affects non-jailbreakers in a VERY negative way.

Not patching this would be like not updating your Java version for six months even though there's a known explo... oh, wait, Apple did that, too.

Reply Score: 5

v RE: Gotta disagree on one point...
by macUser on Tue 31st Aug 2010 04:33 UTC in reply to "Gotta disagree on one point..."
Manish Member since:
2009-12-18

Well, your username "macUser" tells scores how much you are obsessed with Apple. This tells us the strength of Apple's Reality Distortion Field.

So it is natural, you would speak against anyone who is against Apple

Reply Score: 2

Zifre Member since:
2009-10-04

Well, your username "macUser" tells scores how much you are obsessed with Apple. This tells us the strength of Apple's Reality Distortion Field.

Just because he likes Macs does not mean that he is an ignorant Apple fanboy. I know several people who use Mac computers but have no intentions of ever buying any iOS device. And a person's username should not matter is discussion of their ideas.

But quite obviously, he is a troll and didn't read the article

Reply Score: 2

Manish Member since:
2009-12-18

Just because he likes Macs does not mean that he is an ignorant Apple fanboy. I know several people who use Mac computers but have no intentions of ever buying any iOS device. And a person's username should not matter is discussion of their ideas.

But quite obviously, he is a troll and didn't read the article


I was just pointing out that the chances of being an Apple fanboy is pretty high. I have many friends who have MBP and love it. They don't have obsession or blind love. His comments were weird and yeah, you are correct - he is a troll

Reply Score: 1

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Ah, but in Thom's reality distorted field, closing security holes is fighting against jailbreakers that exploit them. Since you can't jailbreak a phone without exploiting a security hole, fixing security holes is a bad thing for Apple to do.


Troll.

How about you read the article? Namely, the part where I said fixing these holes is NOT proof for the fight against jailbreaking?

Reply Score: 2

macUser Member since:
2006-12-15

"Ah, but in Thom's reality distorted field, closing security holes is fighting against jailbreakers that exploit them. Since you can't jailbreak a phone without exploiting a security hole, fixing security holes is a bad thing for Apple to do.


Troll.

How about you read the article? Namely, the part where I said fixing these holes is NOT proof for the fight against jailbreaking?
"

Thom, you're the one trolling flamebait.

To date, jailbreakers exploit security vulnerabilities. Patch the holes and suddenly you're fighting jailbreakers?

Just point out all of the jailbreakers Apple has fought. You can't because there aren't any. Of course, I expect you to ignore that fact.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Gotta disagree on one point...
by bert64 on Tue 31st Aug 2010 13:50 UTC in reply to "Gotta disagree on one point..."
bert64 Member since:
2007-04-23

There was a flaw in the bootloader of the first iphone, 3G and early 3GS models which could also be used to jailbreak the phones, but only if you had a physical USB connection to the phone...

They should take a similar approach to it that google did with the nexus one, you can jailbreak the phone if you have the ability to physically connect a computer to it, and by doing so you erase any data already on the phone and lose the ability to receive support from apple.

Reply Score: 2

Other little known facts
by fretinator on Tue 31st Aug 2010 01:20 UTC
fretinator
Member since:
2005-07-06

1. Apple doesn't mind people running OSX on non-Apple hardware.
2. Apple encourages other companies to make Mac-compatible machines.
3. Apple has no problem with people syncing non-Apple devices with iTunes.
4. Apple provides simple battery replacement for all of its devices.
5. Apple is happy when websites try to figure out what they are releasing next - especially when they are right!

I just thought it would be good to clear up these common misunderstandings.

Reply Score: 14

v RE: Other little known facts
by mjtomlin on Tue 31st Aug 2010 08:32 UTC in reply to "Other little known facts"
RE[2]: Other little known facts
by bouhko on Tue 31st Aug 2010 12:56 UTC in reply to "RE: Other little known facts"
bouhko Member since:
2010-06-24

Fanboy detected !

Apple forbids the installation of OSX on non-apple hardware in its EULA [1].

Maybe Microsoft doesn't encourage other to write windows-compatible operating systems, but they haven't sued ReactOS or WINE (not an OS, but you get the point). Remember Psystar ?

There is a difference between "not encouraging" and "suing everybody".

[1] http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/macosx105.pdf

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Other little known facts
by Tony Swash on Tue 31st Aug 2010 15:41 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Other little known facts"
Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22

Fanboy detected !

Apple forbids the installation of OSX on non-apple hardware in its EULA [1].

Maybe Microsoft doesn't encourage other to write windows-compatible operating systems, but they haven't sued ReactOS or WINE (not an OS, but you get the point). Remember Psystar ?

There is a difference between "not encouraging" and "suing everybody".

[1] http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/macosx105.pdf


Similar comments could be applied to this as to the relaxed way Apple pursues jail breakers. If you try to run a business selling hardware or utilities that let people avoid buying Apple hardware Apple will chase you. If you do the same thing for free they leave you alone.

I installed MacOS on a Dell Mini 10v a while back and there is a well established web site that supports doing just that, including downloadable utilities etc. Apple does nothing to shut such sites down. If they started to charge money for any of this then Apple would react. It all seems fairly reasonable to me.

Reply Score: 1

So, let's review.
by Christophe on Tue 31st Aug 2010 02:00 UTC
Christophe
Member since:
2010-08-31

Apple's entire massive, take-no-prisoners, to-the-last-man, death-before-dishonor fight against jailbreaking is:

1. Filed some paperwork with the Library of Congress.

2. Fixed security problems without giving a rat's ass about whether or not their fix was convenient for jailbreakers.

By Apple's standards, that's sending jailbreakers a muffin basket.

Reply Score: 4

RE: So, let's review.
by Kroc on Tue 31st Aug 2010 07:33 UTC in reply to "So, let's review."
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

What you’re missing is the part where they tried as hard as they could to prevent jailbreaking _before_ the release of iOS4, but missed a hole that hackers found in the PDF viewer.

It’s not like Apple provide a doJailbreak (); API for those who want to. Hackers are having to rely on good old-fashioned programming flaws to get in, and it’s not without trying.

Apple don’t want jailbreaking—period. They will up the anté with the next hardware & software release.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: So, let's review.
by Vargol on Tue 31st Aug 2010 18:11 UTC in reply to "RE: So, let's review."
Vargol Member since:
2006-02-28

Oh yes a jail breaking API.

Now let's write the next iOS virus.

int main(void) {
doJailBreak();
doSomethingNasty();
return 0;
}

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: So, let's review.
by Neolander on Tue 31st Aug 2010 20:36 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: So, let's review."
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

This just makes my head hurt.

Root access must be available on the iDevices with or withoug jailbreaking. It is used by iTunes and the App store application, among other things.
Legit jailbreaking just means letting the user run a root terminal app on his phone, in a controlled fashion (ie no rogue app can exploit this terminal app).

Why do you all seem to consider that as a security flaw ? Guys who jailbreak their phone are supposed to know what they are doing and not execute some random script shell in a root terminal. And this kind of user-related security flaw is the *sole* new vulnerability added by jailbreaking.

If jailbreaking didn't exist (which essentially means suppressing the root terminal icon in the phone application panel), root access would still be there for Apple apps. Anyone hacking Apple servers could still remotely shut down all iOS devices in the fashion Apple remotely killed the iPhone 4 prototype. No security flaw would be removed.

How is it hard to understand ?

Edited 2010-08-31 20:38 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: So, let's review.
by Vargol on Wed 1st Sep 2010 16:57 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: So, let's review."
Vargol Member since:
2006-02-28

Some Jailbrakers may know what they are doing its the rest that are at risk, the ones that do it just to be cool or to say ner ner to Apple.

Any programmatic API to give root access is a security hole waiting to be exploited by the next trojan and its not just jailbrakers that will be hit, it'll be anyonewho downloads an App that abuses it before it gets spotted and pulled.

Reply Score: 1

It depends what you mean by "fight"
by Tony Swash on Tue 31st Aug 2010 02:40 UTC
Tony Swash
Member since:
2009-08-22

It depends what you mean by "fight"

It seems to me that Apple plugs security holes that jail breaking uses mostly for security reasons but is probably very happy that that also inconveniences jail breakers. But if a corporation with the amount of cash, resources and will power that Apple clearly does posses wanted to "fight" jail breaking they would be making life much harder for jail breakers. No cease and desist injunctions, no threatening letters from lawyers, nobody busted. All Apple does is plug holes in its OS which has the (from their point of view) the pleasing side effect of blocking off avenues of jail breaking.

I can't see that Apple cares that much about jail breaking - certainly not at the minuscule level that it goes on at currently. Jail breaking is minuscule because about 99% of Apple customers cannot see any advantage to it, and they are right to take that view, it brings the vast majority of Apple customers no added benefit or feature that they feel is lacking.

Apple is obviously keen to limit the spread of any exploits that aid App piracy and that's a good thing. Apps are available in vast numbers and at very low prices precisely because developers earnings are not crushed by piracy.

As a non jail breaker and an avid App buyer I hope Apple continue to contain jail breaking as a super small minority sport and that the App store model flourishes. It's brought me and millions like me nothing but benefits.

Reply Score: 6

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Let's hear about how awful Google, other manufacturers and the carriers are, in the same breath as Apple's sins, eh? Because otherwise, it just looks naïve. Or totally hypocritical. Or downright dishonest.


How about you bite your tongue?

http://www.osnews.com/story/23725/Motorola_Goes_Legal_Against_Custo...
http://www.osnews.com/story/23489/Google_Flicks_Remote_Kill_Switch_...
http://www.osnews.com/story/23717/The_Dirty_Little_Secret_About_Goo...

Just a random selection. Please, if you're going to troll, first be sure we haven't actually reported on the things you say we did not report on. I hope you're man enough to apologise.

Reply Score: 2

Whiners
by vivainio on Tue 31st Aug 2010 06:25 UTC
vivainio
Member since:
2008-12-26

Again, whiners will whine.

Don't like what Apple is doing? Don't buy an iPhone / iPad.

Problem solved.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Whiners
by Adurbe on Tue 31st Aug 2010 12:59 UTC in reply to "Whiners"
Adurbe Member since:
2005-07-06

that sounds like people have a Choice. Its not their fault.. Apple Forced them to buy.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Whiners
by No it isnt on Tue 31st Aug 2010 18:17 UTC in reply to "Whiners"
No it isnt Member since:
2005-11-14

Yes, or to rephrase what you just said: when Apple does something that's against their customers' best interest, you should just avoid being their customer -- BUT FOR GOD'S SAKE SHUT UP ABOUT IT AND LET THE MASSES OF BRAINDEAD FANBOYS TAKE CARE OF THE DISCUSSION.

Reply Score: 3

Comment by Osnusername
by Osnusername on Tue 31st Aug 2010 06:36 UTC
Osnusername
Member since:
2010-08-31

Government: Anyone want some free ice cream?
Electronic Frontier Foundation: Nobody wants ice cream.
Apple: Hey, I want some ice cream.
Government: Anybody else? Are there perhaps any other US cell phone software companies that want free ice cream as well?
Electronic Frontier Foundation: This is 1998. There is nobody else.
Government: Well, I'm not going to buy ice cream for just one person. Sorry, Apple.
Apple: Shucks.

Thom Holwerda: Can you believe how hard Apple fought for that ice cream? What a prick.

Wherein ice cream is the ability to enforce copyright on cell phone software.

Edited 2010-08-31 06:47 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Comment by mjtomlin
by mjtomlin on Tue 31st Aug 2010 07:46 UTC
mjtomlin
Member since:
2010-08-31

#1. As the article says, fixing security holes is not an indication of being anti-jailbreak.

#2. Wanting jailbreaks to be illegal is also not a clear indication of being anti-jailbreak. What Apple is really concerned about, and rightly so, is app piracy. 'Breaking iOS allows the bypassing of signed-code checking, which would then allow pirated apps to install and run. This is a big deal to developers trying to make a living from writing apps, and Apple is obligated to make sure they get paid for their work. Apple has to demonstrate a willingness to protect the developers or they could end being held liable for negligence and ultimately sued by a disgruntled developer who feels Apple isn't doing enough to curb theft.

#3. Apple is not "fighting the jailbreaking community" as the author of this article seems to think. Name one instance when Apple tried to sue a person for jailbreaking their phone. Or tried to sue the hackers who discovered and exploited the vulnerabilities and then developed and distributed the jailbreak. Or the last time Apple tried to shut down Cydia or any other "open" app store? THEY NEVER HAVE! Why? They really just don't care if people want to tinker with their device (although they don't want to have to actively support it either, e.g. it voids the warranty).

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by mjtomlin
by Shkaba on Tue 31st Aug 2010 17:27 UTC in reply to "Comment by mjtomlin"
Shkaba Member since:
2006-06-22

#2. Wanting jailbreaks to be illegal is also not a clear indication of being anti-jailbreak. What Apple is really concerned about, and rightly so, is app piracy. 'Breaking iOS allows the bypassing of signed-code checking, which would then allow pirated apps to install and run. This is a big deal to developers trying to make a living from writing apps, and Apple is obligated to make sure they get paid for their work. Apple has to demonstrate a willingness to protect the developers or they could end being held liable for negligence and ultimately sued by a disgruntled developer who feels Apple isn't doing enough to curb theft.

#3. Apple is not "fighting the jailbreaking community" as the author of this article seems to think. Name one instance when Apple tried to sue a person for jailbreaking their phone. Or tried to sue the hackers who discovered and exploited the vulnerabilities and then developed and distributed the jailbreak. Or the last time Apple tried to shut down Cydia or any other "open" app store? THEY NEVER HAVE! Why? They really just don't care if people want to tinker with their device (although they don't want to have to actively support it either, e.g. it voids the warranty). [/q]


Your points under 2 and 3 are interdependent. Apple tried to make jailbraking illegal so that it could fight jailbreaking ... Apple can not sue anyone who discovers any vulnerability (nor can anyone else for that matter). Next time try to be more logical please.

Edited 2010-08-31 17:33 UTC

Reply Score: 3

Doublespeak
by RagaR on Tue 31st Aug 2010 08:36 UTC
RagaR
Member since:
2010-06-22

Anyone noticed it, too? Apple was fast in fixing the security bug that affected a jailbreak. Other bugs do not get fixed this fast. My guess: Completely unrelated.

Some other aspects.

When you paid your iPhone, the hardware, it is yours. You can do anything you like. i.e. hack the hardware. You can analyze it. But you can not reproduce and sell it without the licenses.

But your not allowed to use a root account of the OS! In any way. You don't have the right to do it. You don't own the software and you don't own the right to alter it, to edit it, to make it usable the way you like.

This is not in balance. No one is asking for the right, to pirate and sell copies of the software. But what users and citizens should be allowed to do is: Use the software like you can use hardware. Especially hack it if you are able to do it.

Apples denies this freedom. Perhaps it is legal before the court to do this. But it is not fair. Apple likes to domineer over its customers.

But you can choose yourself. Be free or let Apple master yourself.

Reply Score: 5

Comment by Kroc
by Kroc on Tue 31st Aug 2010 09:35 UTC
Kroc
Member since:
2005-11-10

Good to see people defending Apple.

Let’s just roll over and wake up to find that we no longer have control over our own computers. When the current crop of desktop OSes become obsolete, we’ll suddenly realise the significance of what we’ve let slip away by singing the vendor’s justifications to remove basic freedoms we take for granted.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by Kroc
by vivainio on Tue 31st Aug 2010 09:48 UTC in reply to "Comment by Kroc"
vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26

Good to see people defending Apple.

Yeah, let's all defend the "little people" that are vigorously opposed to these policies, yet are willing to sponsor Apple empire by buying a $600 phone because they like (nay, are "entitled to") their shiny apps?

People buying these devices know what they are getting into.

Reply Score: 2

There's more to that
by koffie on Tue 31st Aug 2010 10:36 UTC
koffie
Member since:
2010-05-06

Of-course Apple has act against jailbreaking. Don't forget they have a few obligations and interests, both commercial and legal.

First off, there's AT&T. Should be obvious they don't want jail-breaking since it potentially opens the phone towards other networks.

Secondly, there's the FCC. All devices on the carrier's networks have to be validated by them. Having a phone wide-open results in Apple not being able to guarantee that the phones will not be used to disturb the workings of the cellular networks (which have been proven to have very weak security).

Thirdly, there is are the applications on the phones. Unlike consoles like the Wii, where primary uses for breaking into the console is piracy, there's also a valid use to install custom, unauthorized - but usefull applications, directly competing with their Appstore. That however, does not mean piracy is not an issue, because it certainly is. Apps are pirated, and Apple should do as much as possible to protect it's loyal developers pushing apps onto the stores and relying on them to pay for their bills. Additionally it's also a revenue stream for Apple.

While jailbreaking on itself can be very nice and useful, it's certainly not all that positive or ethical. No company would pretend it's all good and just allow it. Just look at copy-protection-schemes and DRM. In that regards, Apple is very customer-oriented, where they don't want the security to get into the way of their vision of the "user experience" - and they're doing a pretty damn good job imo. I'm pretty sure Apple knows that sooner or later, holes will be found, and a jailbreak-method will be out but from their pov, they just have to act to prevent it, but it's not like they're spending huge amounts on locking down the entire phone.

PS: my iphone is jailbroken.

Reply Score: 0

RE: There's more to that
by vivainio on Tue 31st Aug 2010 11:10 UTC in reply to "There's more to that"
vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26

While jailbreaking on itself can be very nice and useful, it's certainly not all that positive or ethical. No company would pretend it's all good and just allow it.


http://imgur.com/P5Qma.png

Reply Score: 2

RE: There's more to that
by bitwelder on Tue 31st Aug 2010 11:14 UTC in reply to "There's more to that"
bitwelder Member since:
2010-04-27

Secondly, there's the FCC. All devices on the carrier's networks have to be validated by them. Having a phone wide-open results in Apple not being able to guarantee that the phones will not be used to disturb the workings of the cellular networks (which have been proven to have very weak security).

So, I gather e.g. N900 did not get FCC approval? You sure?

Reply Score: 3

Apple doesn't fight very hard
by ctwise on Tue 31st Aug 2010 11:48 UTC
ctwise
Member since:
2007-02-28

This whole conversation seems blown out of proportion. It's mainly a discussion of semantics and viewpoint. So let's just focus on the facts.

- iPhones have been jailbroken since the early days
- Jailbreak exploits survive release after release
- There are no active systems in place that check for jailbroken phones
- There are no negative technical actions taken against jailbroken phones
- Apple has tried to get jailbreaking a phone declared illegal

In general, Apple is lackadaisical about plugging security holes used to jailbreak phones. If you can use a security hole to root a device over the network - that's fixed quickly - if you can only use it by physically connecting to the device - they take their time.

What, I believe, Gruber is saying, is exactly that. Apple hasn't declared all out war on jailbreakers. Let's put our thinking caps on and put together a list of simple ways Apple could mess with jailbroken phones.

- They could scan the phones on connection to iTunes, looking for jailbreak signatures and suspend iTunes accounts.
- They could brick phones that contain jailbreak signatures.
- They could report users to carriers that have jailbreak tethering apps.
- They could plug jailbreak holes with point releases.

And these are just the simplest things that they could do. But they don't. They mostly ignore jailbreaking. To the point that their former spokesmen was on a talk show with his jailbroken phone projected for the world to see.

I'm with one of the other posters, I wish Apple would provide a known path to jailbreaking devices. A supported API to bypass the Apple eco-system. You have to press the "Yes, I know I'm losing my warranty by doing this and there's no guarantee my jailbreak apps will survive updates, button" but no security holes would be necessary. But I'm not holding my breath.

Reply Score: 4

This article is crap...
by apoclypse on Tue 31st Aug 2010 12:46 UTC
apoclypse
Member since:
2007-02-17

Apple has never actively gone after jialbreakers and haven pretty much dragged their feet when it comes to stopping jailbreaks from happening on their device. Apple could do a lot more to deter jailbreakers than it currently does. Look at Sony and the PS3 for examples. Apple is nowhere near in the same ballpark as what goes on there. In-fact Apple has always been rather lenient with the hacker community as long as these hackers don't try to 1) monetize the hack to Apple's detriment (Psystar) 2). Use some sort of security exploit that can potentially create issues for users not interested in jailbreaking their device.

At this point Thom is talking crap, and/or has really short memory when it comes to Apple. Regardless of Apple's intention with the legality of jailbreaking your device they have never actively gone after jailbreak users or developers nor have they locked down their device to the point where doing anything jailbreak related will brick, report, or block your phone. Nothing at all.

So Apple doesn't have a supported backdoor to their software, neither does the Xbox, or a PS3 (Sony recently removed their only supported hacker related door, though it was very limited in what it gave access to). Why don't you complain about them? They've done much worst than Apple has ever done to the jailbreak community. Apple, like MS, and Sony are obligated to protect their developers because that's where the money is at. Their huge Appstore shows that what they are doing works and developers like me appreciate that extra layer of protection, something that I personally think is missing on the Android devices where piracy is rampant. Google is not really doing much about it. They either don't care or have no idea how to go about it. Code obfuscation is a shitty way to protect developers.

Reply Score: 2

"not fighting" = not suing
by Adurbe on Tue 31st Aug 2010 13:04 UTC
Adurbe
Member since:
2005-07-06

Apple are under no obligation to make it easy to jailbreak their phones. They sold a product. You bought the product AS SOLD.

They will support and warranty this product as it was sold. If you take it upon yourself to change things via unsupported hacks. They wont Stop you, but they certainly wont help you if it goes wrong. Why should they?

Reply Score: 1

RE: "not fighting" = not suing
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 31st Aug 2010 13:25 UTC in reply to ""not fighting" = not suing"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Apple are under no obligation to make it easy to jailbreak their phones. They sold a product. You bought the product AS SOLD.

They will support and warranty this product as it was sold. If you take it upon yourself to change things via unsupported hacks. They wont Stop you, but they certainly wont help you if it goes wrong. Why should they?


Another one who didn't read. Fantastic.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: "not fighting" = not suing
by Adurbe on Tue 31st Aug 2010 18:27 UTC in reply to "RE: "not fighting" = not suing"
Adurbe Member since:
2005-07-06

i did read the article and am, tbh, confused at the assertion I did not. Anyway, will clarify.

Apple have apparently taken the logic that they are fixing holes. BUT they are well within their rights to sue people who are jailbreaking and breaching the terms of use of the product AS SOLD (as per my comment above)

Remember 'jailbreaking' is an umbrella term which is used for unlocking of carrier locks (legit), installing 3rd party os/addons (legitish) to outright software piracy (100% not legit)

Reply Score: 2

Sigh
by richsax on Tue 31st Aug 2010 13:55 UTC
richsax
Member since:
2010-08-16

Gruber is right. Thom is wrong.

What else is new...

Reply Score: 1

RE: Sigh
by Zifre on Tue 31st Aug 2010 17:22 UTC in reply to "Sigh"
Zifre Member since:
2009-10-04

Gruber is right. Thom is wrong.

What else is new...

Anything to back up that statement, or just because you said so.

Reply Score: 2

Truth is in the middle ...
by RshPL on Tue 31st Aug 2010 16:50 UTC
RshPL
Member since:
2009-03-13

Obviously Apple doesn't like the jailbreaking community and they are not turning a blind eye to it but neither they are declaring an all-out war ... why the big fuss guys?

Reply Score: 1

Patent Against Jailbreaking
by ebresie on Tue 31st Aug 2010 16:52 UTC
ebresie
Member since:
2010-08-31

So I suppose the patent against jailbreaking represents "supporting jailbreaking"?

See http://www.engadget.com/2010/08/21/apple-attempts-to-patent-kill-sw...

Reply Score: 2

Agree with Gruber
by siraf72 on Thu 2nd Sep 2010 12:53 UTC
siraf72
Member since:
2006-02-22

I own a jailbroked (jailbroken?) iPhone 2G. I had to Jailbreak it since day one as its only supposed to work on AT&T and i'm using it in Saudi, Bahrain, etc.

I have to say i never felt apple put that much effort into preventing the phone from being jailbroken as i've updated my phone over the years. If they were *that* keen on it they would have released far more "security updates"

Its worth noting though if jail beaking were very easy far far more people would be running copied App Store apps. This would hurt developers more than anyone...

Gruber is an apple zealot, but he generally calls it as he sees it. And I agree that Apple didn't really try that hard to stop Jailbreaking.

Reply Score: 1