To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
symbian and blackberry require signed apps and don't give root access to most of the apps in contrast to iPhone.
If application does not allow password change, then root access should not be allowed.
As I said this is insecure device. Has nothing to do with crappy car comparison. Bad design is bad design.
Really? What about hacked/jailbroken Symbian and Blackberry devices?
A non-jailbroken iPhone sandboxes apps and definitely does not give root access to them. It also code-signs all installed apps.
Of course you probably realise this, you're just being a moron.
[quote]A non-jailbroken iPhone sandboxes apps and definitely does not give root access to them. It also code-signs all installed apps.[/quote]
you must be dreaming assuming nice theory with sad reality (number of security issues with iPhone is qute amazing)
what would be a point to jailbreak blackberry?
find similar security problems with blackberry (and tons more that are marketing signature of iPhone e.g. clear text passwords to encrypt device and so on)
iPhone is nice but jailbroken or not this is not secure device
and this is more recent nasty story:
http://blog.intego.com/2009/11/11/intego-security-memo-hacker-tool-...
"symbian and blackberry require signed apps"
also
http://developer.android.com/guide/publishing/app-signing.html





Member since:
2006-05-04
nope:
symbian and blackberry require signed apps and don't give root access to most of the apps in contrast to iPhone.
If application does not allow password change, then root access should not be allowed.
As I said this is insecure device. Has nothing to do with crappy car comparison. Bad design is bad design.