Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 19th Jan 2008 21:17 UTC, submitted by Francis Kuntz
One of the three authors of Sun's DTrace, Adam Leventhal, has discovered something very interesting using DTrace on Mac OS X. "As has been thoroughly recorded, Apple has included DTrace in Mac OS X. I've been using it as often as I have the opportunity, and it's a joy to be able to use the fruits of our labor on another operating system. But I hit a rather surprising case recently which led me to discover a serious problem with Apple's implementation." So, what is this problem? "Wow. So Apple is explicitly preventing DTrace from examining or recording data for processes which don't permit tracing. This is antithetical to the notion of systemic tracing, antithetical to the goals of DTrace, and antithetical to the spirit of open source. I'm sure this was inserted under pressure from ISVs, but that makes the pill no easier to swallow. To say that Apple has crippled DTrace on Mac OS X would be a bit alarmist, but they've certainly undermined its efficacy and, in doing do, unintentionally damaged some of its most basic functionality. To users of Mac OS X and of DTrace: Apple has done a service by porting DTrace, but let's convince them to go one step further and port it properly."
Thread beginning with comment 296906
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-30
Member since:2005-11-21
Right, and you have a license to use the Software/Operating System under the terms you signed with AT&T. To be more clear, you agreed to every part of the EULA that this entails. Since we are discussing Software, you either think it's not enforceable by crippling it to prevent unauthorized code modification or you think they don't have a right to do so, because you paid for the phone. You paid for the service which includes the phone.
I don't have a problem with people hacking and violating their EULA and other legal agreements. I have a problem with people complaining that their warranties are voided and if they brick it they should get support from Apple to fix it.
Grow up.
Edited 2008-01-19 23:47 UTC
Member since:2005-08-17
And what's wrong with iPhone hacking? Why are you even forced to use a media player to use your phone? You paid for the damn phone, this is means you can do with it whatever you like.
You didn't pay for the phone, You paid for a license to use the phone. So you can only use the phone in the ways specified in the license that you agreed to.
Member since:2005-12-14
I don't know what ISVs he's talking about, but this problem with iTunes seems to be related to iPhone hacking. It wouldn't surprise me if that was the only reason for modifying dtrace to work that way.
iTunes is just an example: a bunch of third party apps also set this flag (through ptrace(2)) to prevent users from examining them with DTrace or debugging tools. I imagine there are similar issues with stuff like iTunes and the DVD player which contain code which litigious parties might think should be hidden from prying eyes.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-06-29
I don't know what ISVs he's talking about, but this problem with iTunes seems to be related to iPhone hacking. It wouldn't surprise me if that was the only reason for modifying dtrace to work that way.