Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The iOS 7 Jailbreak Fiasco

Unknown Lamer posted about 7 months ago | from the perils-of-proprietary-devices dept.

IOS 210

Bismillah writes "Evad3rs' new iOS 7 jailbreak featured a Chinese app store that sold pirated software, and which was pulled from Evasi0n7 soon after launch. Latest rumors say that the exploit used for Evasi0n7 was stolen by a certain person, offered up for sale, so the Evad3rs did a deal with TaiG instead. Jay 'Saurik' Freeman of Cydia meanwhile isn't happy about the whole thing, saying he was given no time to test Evasi0n7."

cancel ×

210 comments

Jailbreakingg (4, Insightful)

TyFoN (12980) | about 7 months ago | (#45773985)

It's funny. In any other operating evironment you would call these root exploits.
However in the Apple camp it's simply jailbreaking. One does not dear imply that the iphone is insecure :)

Re:Jailbreakingg (5, Insightful)

Kell Bengal (711123) | about 7 months ago | (#45773999)

It's more a case of regaining entry after being locked out of your own house, rather than someone else breaking in.

Re:Jailbreakingg (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774041)

It's more a case of regaining entry after being locked out of your own house, rather than someone else breaking in.

Except that the burglar could use the same route.

Re:Jailbreakingg (5, Insightful)

Nyder (754090) | about 7 months ago | (#45774823)

It's more a case of regaining entry after being locked out of your own house, rather than someone else breaking in.

Except that the burglar could use the same route.

Or the police, or the NSA or the FBI, etc....

Sure except... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45775063)

...they need physical access and your lock code. It's not just one exploit either, it's a string of them to break through the various protections. It's not as simple as you make it out to be.

Re: Jailbreakingg (1)

Threni (635302) | about 7 months ago | (#45775093)

No they just need to pick up the phone.

Re:Jailbreakingg (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774051)

...and then having the power to fill your house to the brim with free clones of paid stuff, should you so choose.

Jailbreaking to work around OS/carrier lameness, sure. Trying to justify the pirated/infringing apps you warezed and put on your device for free, essentially ripping off developers for their 99c, supremely lame.

Re:Jailbreakingg (5, Insightful)

JaredOfEuropa (526365) | about 7 months ago | (#45774103)

ripping off developers for their 99c, supremely lame

I never really understood this. You go and get a really expensive phone, then begrudge someone their 99 cents. Or seriously spend more than a few seconds thought on whether or not to buy that "really expensive" $1.99 app. And subsequently get suckered into dropping tens of dollars on in-app purchases in in some freemium game. People are weird...

Re:Jailbreakingg (5, Insightful)

Noughmad (1044096) | about 7 months ago | (#45774141)

At big part of it is the feeling that you're special, and that you "beat the system".

Re:Jailbreakingg (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774149)

There's nothing weird about avoiding paying for something if you can.

Especially because a string of 0s and 1s can be copied without taking it away from the original user.

Nobody has a right to "intellectual property", almost all of which in every case is building on the work of others.

If you don't like reality, campaign for a change to the laws of physics or something. Good luck!

Re:Jailbreakingg (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774265)

Speaking of not liking reality...

Re:Jailbreakingg (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774327)

Complain as much as you want: I can copy bits from you, and it won't take anything away from you. I shall continue, and it's highly unlikely you'll be able to stop me. DItto for the other million+ people.

Re:Jailbreakingg (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774521)

Complain as much as you want: I can copy bits from you, and it won't take anything away from you. I shall continue, and it's highly unlikely you'll be able to stop me. DItto for the other million+ people.

I'm sure you'll feel the same when someone gets their paws on your Bitcoin wallet. It is just a string of 0s and 1s.

BTW, why don't you spend your time creating something useful. Anything at all. And then let everyone come along and copy it for free. We're waiting. And don't give me the "What about Linux?" shit. You're a taker, not a giver. The people who have donated their time and efforts to Linux, some of whom have dedicated their lives to it, are givers and you have not earned the right to compare yourselves to them.

Re:Jailbreakingg (4, Interesting)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | about 7 months ago | (#45774565)

You're a taker, not a giver.

+1. some people create things, so they have empathy with other people who create things. others are just takers and add no value to society, so they cannot comprehend how their actions hut those that create. like arguing with a rock. good news is, they rooted their own phones and gave them to chinese hackers, in exchange for free angry birds (yes, I bet they download cracked versions of free apps too lol).

Re:Jailbreakingg (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774715)

What a bunch of crap. I create software all the time. Right now as I ramble on Slashdot I'm writing some software to help with someone's PhD research. Since there was nothing suitable already available, and nobody else in the department had the skills, the researcher would have had to hire someone.

But they happened to have a casual conversation with me about this, and I asked to see their draft paper to find out what was missing. The following evening, I said, "Oh, I can do that." And then I did it. And do you know what I charged for it? Nothing. And do you know why I charged nothing? Because I can. Because I have the skills, and I'm not going to squander those skills like some primitive who thinks they're a special snowflake to be valued. It's not as if they're exploiting me: when the sum of human scholarship is increased, everybody wins.

So, fuck you and your artificial scarcity. If someone wants to pay you to write software, good for you and good for them. I would never force you to do anything. But I will do as much as I can for free, and I'll take anything I can, too. If you have a problem with this, you can... cry, perhaps? IDK. What is it that infants normally do during the, "BUT IT'S MINE!!!" phase of early development?

Re:Jailbreakingg (4, Insightful)

Nyder (754090) | about 7 months ago | (#45774857)

You're a taker, not a giver.

+1. some people create things, so they have empathy with other people who create things. others are just takers and add no value to society, so they cannot comprehend how their actions hut those that create. like arguing with a rock. good news is, they rooted their own phones and gave them to chinese hackers, in exchange for free angry birds (yes, I bet they download cracked versions of free apps too lol).

Takers & givers. Pitchers & Catchers, Tops & Bottoms. Good & Evil. Left & right. 1's & 0's.

You do realize that most of life is a binary system and you can't generally have one without the other?

In other words, some people give, some people take. It's part of life. If you feel superior because you are one and not the other, then you are missing out on how life really works.

Does that person downloading a pirated app really hurt the developer? No it doesn't. That person most likely doesn't pay for software, so the developer would never get money from him. But oddly enough, there is enough people who have no problem paying for stuff, and that is why developers & producers make money because there is enough people buying to turn profit. It has always been this way. Thinking your superior because you pay for stuff is deluding yourself. Thinking your smarter because you don't pay for stuff is also deluding yourself. We are just all playing our parts in life.

Good software/music/movies sell and make money. Crappy software/music/movies don't sell and they blame it on people pirating the stuff then the fact they made some crappy software/music/movies.

Re:Jailbreakingg (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774527)

Complain as much as you want: I can copy bits from you, and it won't take anything away from you.

Apart from the revenue I should have got.

I shall continue, and it's highly unlikely you'll be able to stop me. DItto for the other million+ people.

Neither of which makes it right. Just because you can copy someone's digital work and they still have it does not morally justify your actions.

If you want a copy of a digital work, then you should reward the creator for creating it - the fact that they don't lose their bits is irrelevant. Otherwise, why should anyone bother to create any digital work?

Of course some people do make copies and reward the creator, so the creators do continue to create.

If everyone had your attitude, no-one would create any digital products.

As it is, the people that don't pay are leaching off those that do.

Re:Jailbreakingg (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774641)

"Apart from the revenue I should have got." is one big problem in your logic. I have pirated a big pile of stuff through the years. But if I couldn't have pirated them, I would NEVER have bought them. Ever. I don't go to the movies and I don't buy movies but I download and watch them for free sometimes. If I can't watch a Hollywood movie, either because I can't find a pirated version with good enough image quality or because the movie is so incredibly bad that I have to stop watching (which happens more and more by the way) I go and watch some fan-movie, documentary or something else.

So I'm arguing that Hollywood haven't lost a dime because of me. I'm not paying them whether I'm pirating or not.

Re:Jailbreakingg (2, Insightful)

znrt (2424692) | about 7 months ago | (#45775175)

Apart from the revenue I should have got.

should you? oh, because you said so? you have no right to get a revenue from your work, you only have the right to try. if it doesn't work, don't blame it on others.

Neither of which makes it right.

nor wrong.

Just because you can copy someone's digital work and they still have it does not morally justify your actions.

if you find it's inmoral, don't do it. what i find morally injustifiable is you wanting to impose your personal morals on others. keep them for yourself.

If you want a copy of a digital work, then you should reward the creator for creating it

no, see above.

further, I didn't ask the creator for anything.

even further, the creator didn't "reward" the zillions of people whose effort he himself used in order to produce his digital work.

the fact that they don't lose their bits is irrelevant.

it isn't. this is a necessary condition for "theft" in any legal code. you IP zealots want to equate copying with theft and that's why you come up with this "loss of rightful revenue" crap, which isn't rightful at all.

Otherwise, why should anyone bother to create any digital work?

exactly. why should they? to cry for some revenue they think themselves entitled to? funny.

fact is many of them do it just because they want. others because they actually do get a revenue. so what?

If everyone had your attitude, no-one would create any digital products.

it's not an attitude, it's elementary common sense and it is pervasive. and still ... people keeps creating.

As it is, the people that don't pay are leaching off those that do.

besides ignoring (or twisting) reality you are intending to insult a lot of people with this. i would say it is inmoral, if it weren't just lame.

Re:Jailbreakingg (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774861)

By that token, nobody has a right to their life, to the physical property in their homes, or to not be assaulted/raped because the laws of physics does not prevent that.

Re:Jailbreakingg (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774951)

That argument couldn't be more sophomoric. The laws of physics don't allow replication of physical property, nor do they allow damage to the person or physical property without affecting the original owner. But my copying your 99 cent app without paying actually does nothing to you at all. See, I would NOT have paid for it. If I wanted to pay for it, I... would have.

It's not your opinion about how I "should" behave which affects whether I decide to pay. It's mine. I often pay for software, but I also often don't. If I don't, I'm not harming you - any more than I'm harming you because you fail to successfully set up a protection racket involving me as victim - so please feel free to get a grip.

Re:Jailbreakingg (5, Insightful)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | about 7 months ago | (#45774177)

You're right - you really don't get it.

Most of us who jailbreak aren't interested in stealing apps. Heck, by default those repositories aren't even available to a jailbreaker. Instead, it's about adding functionality. Frankly, look at some of the new iOS 7 features... We jail breakers had those in iOS 5 and 6.

Prior to iOS 7, iPhone apps running on a non-retina iPad were displayed in low res, even though there was a high res "retina" version of the app's images readily available. The fix? A jailbreak App called RetinaPad (which, incidentally, I paid for). A free app, SBSettings, added some quick access toggles to the notification pull down - another useful feature that iOS 7 borrowed.

Want to ssh into your iPhone? Gotta jailbreak it first. Want a decent wifi scanner for troubleshooting? Again, you need to jailbreak. Want to be able to use gestures to replace the home button? Again, you need to jailbreak.

There are lots of reasons for jail breaking that have absolutely nothing to do with theft. They're probably of interest only to a minority of iOS users, but they exist. As iOS matures, those reasons gradually dwindle... but I can't see them ever going away completely.

Re:Jailbreakingg (1)

ebubna (765457) | about 7 months ago | (#45774269)

seriously. i want my phone to look the way i want it to look and act the way i want it to act, within reason. the two main things im missing on my non-jailbroken phone are a carrier name editor so i can delete that crap, and a couple little apps that let me put five icons across to fit more crap on my home screen. bad dogs

Re:Jailbreakingg (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774275)

It sounds like it would be easier to just buy another phone. Why would anyone ever pay money for such a severely limited device?

Re:Jailbreakingg (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774431)

Because of the Apple logo on the back side, and the default ringtone..

Re:Jailbreakingg (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774797)

You mean any phone you buy from a carrier in the US? If you're carrying any phone from Verizon, AT&T, etc etc etc then you're just a hypocrite and a stinking liar.

That's funny (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45775223)

because the OS is stable? Because it just works for the most part and has a rich app store that's not chock full of crap that will try to steal from me? Because the hardware isn't shit? and on and on!

Sure, there are tweaks that folks who Jailbreak desire but major features? Not so much, the Apple stuff is solid. In the time I've owned just one iPhone I've watched multiple friends go through Android phone after Android phone bitching about various hardware issues. One of them even switched to an Apple phone when the 5 came out and hasn't felt the need to upgrade in over a year whereas before he went through multiple Android phones. I upgrade every few years because I want to and sell off my old phone or use it for a media player in the garage. I watch my friends throw their old Android in the trash, the junk drawer, or in one case go through 3 "replacement" units trying to get a piece of hardware that would fully function for more than a month - they finally bought a new phone. Limited? Maybe a little out of the box but it sure beats the alternative in my book...

Re:Jailbreakingg (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774309)

Actually, if you've ever bought a iPhone in certain Asian countries - such as MKB in Bangkok, the phones from small dealers are sold pre-jailbroken and loaded up with pirated Apps, movies and other content, as a "service" to the customer. As phones are frequently sold outright and off plan, this kind of distribution channel is a much higher fraction of the market, than it is in the US , where subsidised phones dominate. This likely represents millions of devices. Given jailbreak downloads are typically 10 million , its at least a very significant fraction, and it wouldn't be unreasonably be a majority.

I strongly suspect the motivation for, and the rate of jailbreaking varies wildly by country.

I'd also hazard a guess, the whilst there are people with pretty reasonable motivations such as the Wi-fi scanner example, they represent a tiny fraction of the jailbroken device owners - most have it done for them for commercial reasons - either explicitly to pirate Apps, or out of ignorance when its done for them because the offer of "free extras" is too good.

Re:Jailbreakingg (1)

cyber-vandal (148830) | about 7 months ago | (#45774321)

Wifi Analyzer and SwiftKey are two apps that are so useful to me that I will never even consider an Apple phone.

Re:Jailbreakingg (3, Interesting)

Rick Zeman (15628) | about 7 months ago | (#45774921)

Wifi Analyzer and SwiftKey are two apps that are so useful to me that I will never even consider an Apple phone.

Wow. After switching from Android to iOS those are the ONLY two apps I miss...not enough to regret switching, though.

Re:Jailbreakingg (4, Insightful)

Nerdfest (867930) | about 7 months ago | (#45774379)

The problem is that you're rewarding a company (known for making extremely high profit on their devices) for locking you out of your hardware. Their attitude towards letting you install the software you want is not going to improve in the future with people doing that.

Re:Jailbreakingg (5, Insightful)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | about 7 months ago | (#45774589)

why don't you just not buy the phone? if you don't want to reward the company that makes the phone? or steal the phone? pro tip: if you paid for the phone you've already rewarded them.

Funny... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45775249)

It also locks YOU out of my phone too! I'm okay with the security model. I don't jailbreak the phone I carry because of this.

I do jailbreak the old model I use for other things and I Jailbreak my iPad to tinker with. So far I've yet to download a single pirated app, it's just not of interest to me when apps are so cheap.

Re:Jailbreakingg (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774435)

Thats' what I've been telling the people around, especially those iSheeples..-''Hey, isit after jailbreak all apps are free? I want to get free apps"...Most people tends to relate Jailbreak with pirated apps while it's much much more than that. I truly appreciate the jailbreakers that find the exploit in each iOS version, I still remember the older days JB was so complicated that make Android's root a shame.

Re:Jailbreakingg (2)

mlts (1038732) | about 7 months ago | (#45774931)

There is one downside of "free" apps. When I read some various iPhone forums, it is amazing how many people get stung by rogue IPAs and end up having to DFU restore.

There is a reason for moderated/curated app stores, and yes, other places might have other people's app for free, but those apps might just bring along more than just the program itself.

Re:Jailbreakingg (2)

mlts (1038732) | about 7 months ago | (#45774899)

Even more basic... want ad blocking? Jailbreak. Want some privacy? JB time. Jailbreaking allows one to use their device, which they paid for (in one way or another) as they see fit.

iBlacklist is another useful feature, only available by jailbreaking. Yes, I can block callers by creating contacts, but it gets old having a bunch of "zzzzRoboCaller" entries in my contacts as opposed to just one blacklist that does the job in a few taps.

Re:Jailbreakingg (1)

quacking duck (607555) | about 7 months ago | (#45775121)

iBlacklist is another useful feature, only available by jailbreaking. Yes, I can block callers by creating contacts, but it gets old having a bunch of "zzzzRoboCaller" entries in my contacts as opposed to just one blacklist that does the job in a few taps.

Glancing quickly at the iBlacklist app, you need to create contacts to blacklist (or whitelist) them anyway.

In any event, you don't need to create separate contacts for every robocaller. I'm still on iOS6 and don't have the proper call block function that was added in iOS7, but I have a single contact for them called "spammer", every time an unknown number fails the 800notes.com / whocallsme.com lookup test it gets added to this contact in just a few taps as well. It has a silent ringtone and custom vibration pattern so faint I never feel it. I have about three dozen numbers listed in that one spam contact.

Re:Jailbreakingg (1)

mlts (1038732) | about 7 months ago | (#45775233)

Now that would be an app whose time has come for iOS -- something like Mr. Number that checks the robodialer databases and blocks the number, preferably with a pickup and hangup (just so the robodialer tries to get a live person on the ACD.)

Re:Jailbreakingg (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774917)

Or you could just get a God Damn Android and be done with it.

Re:Jailbreakingg (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774213)

Most people with Jailbreaks i know do it for Apps that the Great Steve does not allow in the Store (for whatever reason, because of american moral overdrive or because they want to do it themself), not for unlicensed software. Jailbreaks getting more and more timeconsuming to maintain (wait on every new iRelease on a matching jailbreak, applying both, avoid accitentally clicking yes somewhere etc), even for "really expensive $1.99" thats not worth it...

Re:Jailbreakingg (1)

kangsterizer (1698322) | about 7 months ago | (#45774351)

note that "pirated" games these days generally offer an option to disable or bypass the socalled freemium crap (ie inapp purchases where you have to spend hundreds in order to play the game at all). i'd rather pay $10 from scratch, than being hagged into "rating", "liking on facebook", "paying item X, Z, Y for $100+ that are artificially required to enjoy the game. sometimes its way more than $100.". It's an horrible model.

Heck even games such as battlefield and what not - which costs much more to produce, takes longer and more people "only" cost" about $100 with all DLCs every 3 month for a year or two included. And people hate DLCs.

I therefore fully support pirating any game following this model (then again, i don't have an iphone, and i don't really play games on android, so i'm an angel. still, i get the idea.)

Re:Jailbreakingg (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774489)

You can turn off in-app purchases if you lack the will power to say no.

Re:Jailbreakingg (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45775137)

You never understood it? Well, the "expensive phone" is tangible. The trash in the app store is not, and people don't want to pay to try out trash and delete it moments later. Software is information, and information wants to be free.

Re:Jailbreakingg (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774117)

but data should be fweeeeeee!!!!!

Re:Jailbreakingg (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774071)

Oh stop being so melodramatic - the product comes the way it was designed. If you bought it, you should have bought it in the knowledge that what it had to offer was fine for you and not with the intent to whine about any possibility that the company - understandably - has denied you form the start.

Re:Jailbreakingg (1)

Thanshin (1188877) | about 7 months ago | (#45774157)

the product comes the way it was designed. If you bought it, you should have bought it in the knowledge that what it had to offer was fine for you and not with the intent to whine about any possibility that the company - understandably - has denied you form the start.

If they sold it, they should have sold it in the knowledge that the strength of their product's tamper protection was fine for them and not with the intent to whine about any possibility that the buyer - understandably - has broken the weak system.

And yet they whine incessantly.

Re:Jailbreakingg (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774189)

It's not your house, you get to rent it. Don't like the locked garage and the cameras in the bedroom? Move out.

Re:Jailbreakingg (1)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | about 7 months ago | (#45774621)

It's not your house, you get to rent it. Don't like the locked garage and the cameras in the bedroom? Move out.

accurate. if you rent a house and in the lease it says the garage stays locked and there are cameras in the bedroom, then what do you expect? rent a different house, or buy a different house.

Re:Jailbreakingg (2)

Lumpy (12016) | about 7 months ago | (#45774259)

But this case is a random unknown stranger offers to make you keys for your house. And while they are at it, sets up a shop of stolen goods inside the front door.
How do you know they did not make themselves an extra key?

Re:Jailbreakingg (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774399)

You don't, but it sure beats sleeping in the rain.

Re:Jailbreakingg (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774569)

Not really, Sleeping in the rain is great. plus you can lay under a tarp.

Re:Jailbreakingg (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774839)

IT'S A TARP!!!

Re:Jailbreakingg (1)

Nyder (754090) | about 7 months ago | (#45774957)

But this case is a random unknown stranger offers to make you keys for your house. And while they are at it, sets up a shop of stolen goods inside the front door.
How do you know they did not make themselves an extra key?

Just curious, when you put this argument out, did you really think it applied? Explain how a house is like an iPad or iPhone? Explain how your house is locked down like iOS? You can't, because it's not. Banks/realtors do not sell you a house and tell you that the basement is off limits. That you can't park cars in the garage, even though there is room to do so. That you can only use a certain type of glass when you replace the windows. That you can't remodel your house.

You understand how they do not apply with each other?

Re:Jailbreakingg (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45775111)

You must not be able to read, read what he replied to.

Re: Jailbreakingg (1)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | about 7 months ago | (#45774043)

Because as soon as a root exploit is released it's often used to jailbreak.

Which given how far and few between jailbreaks are...

Re:Jailbreakingg (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774347)

It's funny. In any other operating evironment you would call these root exploits.
However in the Apple camp it's simply jailbreaking. One does not dear imply that the iphone is insecure :)

Well ... doing it on purpose to your own device it is jailbreaking and is fine. Having it done without your permission or knowledge is pwning and is an exploit.

Re:Jailbreakingg (1)

tapspace (2368622) | about 7 months ago | (#45774401)

In android parlance, it is called "rooting."

Jailbreak vs Rooting (1, Interesting)

tuppe666 (904118) | about 7 months ago | (#45774437)

In android parlance, it is called "rooting."

Apple treats you as a criminal...and apparently the users act like them, it is done through breaking the weak security of the iOS operating system, often to return basic features.

Google gives you (the option) of control, and supplies ample warning before the user chooses to this, it is an option on some phones...even a selling point, mainly used to load none play applications (Android is Eden...with gates).

Basically nothing like each other.

Re:Jailbreak vs Rooting (4, Insightful)

GrammarPoliceChief (3463019) | about 7 months ago | (#45774549)

Apple treats you as a criminal? I'm sorry but you are simply trolling. iOS is designed for the masses. They do not want problematic user problems, they do not want many ways to do the same task, they should not have to care about the OS. I'm pretty happy with Apples way that they created their ecosystem, it is fair for both the consumer and the developer. Android is difficult if not impossible to root on many devices. Some even come with a fuse on the main SOC package that detects if the phone has been rooted.

I'm not Trolling I'm Rolling (4, Interesting)

tuppe666 (904118) | about 7 months ago | (#45774743)

Apple treats you as a criminal? I'm sorry but you are simply trolling.

http://www.legalzoom.com/intellectual-property-rights/copyrights/apple-responds-eff-jailbreaking [legalzoom.com] FRom the article because I am lazy.

"Apple has responded to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)'s request to the US Copyright Office to declare hacking a smartphone legal; not surprisingly, Apple believes jailbreaking is copyright violation and, therefore, illegal."

Someone needs there mod points removed :)

Re:I'm not Trolling I'm Rolling (5, Informative)

plover (150551) | about 7 months ago | (#45775003)

The line isn't that simple. iOS already knows when it's been jailbroken. There's even an API for that so that programs that deal with security can refuse to operate if they don't trust the environment. Square Payments won't let you read credit cards on a jailbroken device; AirWatch reports jailbreaking back to corporate servers (I keep an un-jailbroken device around just for reading company email); and even Skype pops up a warning dialog that says "this app is unsupported on a jailbroken device."

Since Apple can detect a jailbroken phone, they could obviously take harsher actions themselves. They could shut the phone down, or make it rapidly eat batteries, or delete your accounts, or do any of a hundred different nasty things to the phone. But they don't. They have arrived at a somewhat unstable cease-fire with the jailbreakers. So Apple, in this weird way, actually has OS level "support" for being jailbroken. They don't treat us as criminals.

And they need to. I own many different iDevices, but I wouldn't have even bought the second if I hadn't been able to jailbreak it. I won't upgrade iOS until there's an untethered jailbreak for it. I seriously never consider buying an iDevice unless I have high confidence that I can jailbreak it the day I buy it. It's all a part of making a deal with the devil: if Apple wants my money, they have to tolerate my jailbreaking their device. And I've heard that somewhere around 30% of iPhones are jailbroken -- that's just way too much money for them to walk away from.

Re:I'm not Trolling I'm Rolling (1, Insightful)

jo_ham (604554) | about 7 months ago | (#45775199)

Apple treats you as a criminal? I'm sorry but you are simply trolling.

http://www.legalzoom.com/intellectual-property-rights/copyrights/apple-responds-eff-jailbreaking [legalzoom.com] FRom the article because I am lazy.

"Apple has responded to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)'s request to the US Copyright Office to declare hacking a smartphone legal; not surprisingly, Apple believes jailbreaking is copyright violation and, therefore, illegal."

Someone needs there mod points removed :)

Just so we're clear here, you want to declare taking advantage of a root exploit "legal", but only if it's on an Apple phone.

What about a Linux server? If it's legal to to exploit a root vulnerability on iOS then surely it is on Linux, or Windows, or OS X too, right?

Re:Jailbreak vs Rooting (1)

lophophore (4087) | about 7 months ago | (#45774893)

>> . Some even come with a fuse on the main SOC package that detects if the phone has been rooted.

Really. How about some examples of this? Because it sounds like bullshit to me.

Re:Jailbreak vs Rooting (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774615)

There are other advantages to having Root on Android, besides JUST sideloading apps.

For instance, if you want to change app permissions, you MUST have root to run the tools. If you want to update or remove baked in apps, you MUST have root to do this the right way. If you want to install a mobile linux distro, you NEED root.

The user should not be wholly locked out of actually OWNING the device, which is exactly what strictly enforced user controls like those enacted in Android and iOS do. They prevent you from owning the device, so that either the carrier or the appstore gatekeepers do the owning for you, so that they can regulate your use and use patterns.

Many people are happy for the homogenization in the user experience that such shenanigans offer, and enforcing limited user for primary operation is simply smart given the abusive nature of software in general these days, however-- denying ANY *REAL* control over the device by the user is absurd. Really, what else do you call having locked bootloaders and other obstructions?

I understand that Google and Pals REAAALY (Pretty please with a cheery on top?) Want to not be obstructed in their collection of user data for marketing purposes. However, last I checked, Android was NOT licensed under terms that mandate that such information be made available to them. As a user, it is, and WILL ALWAYS BE *MY CHOICE* what data I will allow my device to transmit, and what applications will be run, when, and under what credentials.

Not what the app developer "wants" to get, and certainly not what Google and Pals ask for, no matter how many times they say "Pretty please".

Weak security?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45775291)

Oh that's pretty rich especially if you espouse Android as the OS alternative here. To Jailbreak an IOS phone requires physical access in nearly every case, a series of steps that often cannot be done remotely, and a string of exploits not just one. Often exploits won't work across all hardware platforms either.

You cannot say the same for Android, not by far. The claim that IOS has "weak security" is just plain wishful thinking and pretty damned amusing really.

Re:Jailbreakingg (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774525)

Wrong, the only time an exploit is used is when the phone is manufactured by a stupid and shortsighted company that locks the bootloader. Otherwise rooting merely refers to installing a new firmware that gives you a way to get root.

Re:Jailbreakingg (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774537)

This would only imply that the iPhone as volatile storage where things can be written. Installing a "root kit" is a user-added exploit.

You might call this a socially engineered trojan horse. So yes, the iPhone is vulnerable to stupid users. Maybe your phone has soldered in the entire OS on a ROM and you are safe. Though you don't impress me as someone invulnerable to social engineering with this comment.

Re:Jailbreakingg (1)

plover (150551) | about 7 months ago | (#45775097)

Despite the name, a rootkit does not generally refer to a generic "tool for getting root" on an unmodified device.

A rootkit is a certain type of malware that hides itself inside the OS by modifying the OS, preventing userland views of its presence. For example, if you ask the OS for a list of files in a folder because you want to see if you have malware on it, the modified file system will conveniently skip listing the files containing the filesystem modifications. How is an anti-virus program supposed to scan for wormy.dll if the OS never tells it that wormy.dll exists?

Re: Jailbreakingg (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774563)

You think kindle runs ios? Coz its called jailbreaking there as well.

$650 and you still don't own it (5, Insightful)

lophophore (4087) | about 7 months ago | (#45774841)

Apple makes nice stuff, but I won't touch any more of it. $650 for an unlocked iPhone 5s and you cannot do what you want with it without a "jailbreak". Contrast with a modern Nexus phone that you can install your own software (e.g. Cyanogenmod) on with a PC and a USB cable.

The same is true for Apple's tablets -- in fact, it is even worse, because "jailbreaking" your iPad is a federal crime under the DMCA.

Apple makes nice stuff, no doubt, but if you cannot change what's inside, you really don't own it.

Re:$650 and you still don't own it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45775251)

And the same can be said for 98% of all Android devices on the market today. Thanks for the selective bashing though.

Re:Jailbreakingg (2)

jo_ham (604554) | about 7 months ago | (#45775171)

Actually, I do refer to this as root exploiting, but if I point that out (as I have in the past) and praised Apple for closing the security hole I get jumped on by Android fanboys calling me an enemy of freedom.

In other words, they care about exploits and security when it's convenient, but not when it's in any way in conflict with bashing Apple.

Re: Jailbreakingg (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45775279)

Jailbreak != root exploit. It starts by getting root but then involved using that privilege to install a bunch of patches to allow installation of apps from outside the App Store.

Evawhat? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45773997)

Wait is this about a new street-gang related soap opera?

remotely disabled? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774009)

We have decided to remotely disable the default installation of TaiG in China for further investigations on the piracy issue.

What else can the team do remotely?

Re:remotely disabled? (1)

amnezick (1253408) | about 7 months ago | (#45774073)

I think what they mean is that after the jailbreak a program runs just on that first boot to install third-party software like Cydia. It has to download it from somewhere so by "remote" they mean they disabled the URL or they removed the URL from a list stored on some server which the program uses.

Oh, I almost forgot they can read your kinky e-mails too.

Confusing summary (5, Insightful)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about 7 months ago | (#45774191)

Evad3rs' new iOS 7 jailbreak featured a Chinese app store that sold pirated software, and which was pulled from Evasi0n7 soon after launch.

Evasi0n7 is the name of the jailbreak?

Latest rumors say that the exploit used for Evasi0n7 was stolen by a certain person, offered up for sale, so the Evad3rs did a deal with TaiG instead.

TaiG is the name of the Chinese app store? Who's the "certain person," and why does them stealing it lead ("...so...") to the jail break creators doing this deal with TaiG?

Jay 'Saurik' Freeman of Cydia meanwhile isn't happy about the whole thing, saying he was given no time to test Evasi0n7."

What's Cydia, and why is it important that they have time to test the jailbreak?

Re:Confusing summary (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774283)

Just click on the link. The single Twitter post should explain everything.

In other news, great job Slashdot. We need more submissions like this.

Re:Confusing summary (1)

derfy (172944) | about 7 months ago | (#45774305)

Shh, don't encourage dupes!

Re:Confusing summary (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774315)

Evad3rs' new iOS 7 jailbreak featured a Chinese app store that sold pirated software, and which was pulled from Evasi0n7 soon after launch.

Evasi0n7 is the name of the jailbreak?

Latest rumors say that the exploit used for Evasi0n7 was stolen by a certain person, offered up for sale, so the Evad3rs did a deal with TaiG instead.

TaiG is the name of the Chinese app store? Who's the "certain person," and why does them stealing it lead ("...so...") to the jail break creators doing this deal with TaiG?

Jay 'Saurik' Freeman of Cydia meanwhile isn't happy about the whole thing, saying he was given no time to test Evasi0n7."

What's Cydia, and why is it important that they have time to test the jailbreak?

The summary can be confusing for people that have no prior knowledge of these names (as I guess many tech story summaries would be if you don't know the subject). Luckily there is a fairly short article linked in said summary that makes it all fairly clear.

Re:Confusing summary (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about 7 months ago | (#45774453)

Luckily there is a fairly short Slashdotted article linked in said summary that makes it all fairly clear.

FTFY :)

Re:Confusing summary (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774323)

I, too, had great difficulty comprehending this post. I'm sure it must be some secret code.

Re:Confusing summary (-1, Redundant)

tapspace (2368622) | about 7 months ago | (#45774393)

What's Cydia, and why is it important that they have time to test the jailbreak?

Your post had some credibility up until that point, man! Get with the times! It's like saying "What's Full House?" in the 90s. You don't have to like it, but do you live under a rock?

Re:Confusing summary (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about 7 months ago | (#45774445)

It's like saying "What's Full House?" in the 90s.

A gameshow [wikipedia.org] hosted by Bob Monkhouse. Every knows that.

You don't have to like it, but do you live under a rock?

Even if I knew what Cydia was (which I vaguely do, now), that still wouldn't tell me why they were upset that they hadn't had time to test the jailbreak.

Re: Confusing summary (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774595)

You are complaining that "geek" (at least wannabe geek) news site posts a short article that is too geeky for the general audience!? If the topic does not concern you enough to have enough background knowledge to make heads or tails of this post, it probably isn't for you. Just read the next one.

Re: Confusing summary (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774959)

Summaries should summarize and provide a bit of context. The fact that the audience may or may not have familiarity with this particular topic is not an excuse to get lazy. Look at that summary from yesterday about that PR manager that said something about AIDS. It was like word soup! It's not hard to parenthesize a bit of context. "did a deal with TaiG, a group, instead. Cydia, , isn't happy because he didn't get to test." Something like that wouldn't be hard.

Re:Confusing summary (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774637)

I too have no idea what Cydia is.

It's great that you're so well versed in pop culture and niche technology products, but at least the most minimum of description could be included.

Re:Confusing summary (1)

vedavis (1111227) | about 7 months ago | (#45774933)

(If you cannot comprehend,) Move along, nothing to see here. - Officer Barbrady.

Re:Confusing summary (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45775183)

It's seems that newfag summer is now perpetual on Slashdot... The only thing that would have made your post stupider is if you had logged in via Twatter.

Don't buy shit that needs jailbreaking (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774199)

I don't understand why people have so low self esteem...

Not touching it. (2)

Lumpy (12016) | about 7 months ago | (#45774237)

A jailbreak comes out from a unproven group, Only fools are installing this one.

Re: Not touching it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774605)

Considering that this is the group that released ios6 jailbreak, its hardly unknown. In fact it is the best known group of ios hackers. They just sold out to some chinese company and are now trying to backtrack to save their street cred.

Re: Not touching it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774757)

Not true. Please research jailbraking and see that they are the newest to the scene and still unproven.

Send touch events and capture other apps screen ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774363)

On a jailbroken device (in the past version at least), is it possible to have a app 1/ capture the screen of another application 2/ send touch events to this application 3/ do 1 and 2 while off screen ?

Evasi0ns response (5, Informative)

dave1102 (3473681) | about 7 months ago | (#45774415)

I actually made an account just to post this -- evasi0n's response to all the criticism/speculation: http://evasi0n.com/l.html [evasi0n.com]

I guess this is an Apple thing...!? (1)

dohzer (867770) | about 7 months ago | (#45774623)

I have no idea what any of this means, but I'll get my mother to translate in the morning.

Politics (1, Insightful)

wvmarle (1070040) | about 7 months ago | (#45774903)

As if reporting about US politics isn't enough, Slashdot is now apparently even reporting political games played within the blackhat/exploit scene. Honestly I have no idea what they're talking about in that summary.

Oh well, at least there is some kind of a link to something technical. And Apple, of course.

And I'll just go back to trying to unlock that uncooperative HTC Evo 3D...

It's an Apple thing, You wouldn't understand. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45774907)

Apparently in the Apple community you should only allow trusted foreign hackers to root your phone and install their apps. In case they pwn your bank account at least you know who to rail against. Who knew.

Saurik Lives! (1)

vedavis (1111227) | about 7 months ago | (#45774947)

Jay Freeman just posted this on Twitter: "I want to make certain a big thank you goes out to @rpetrich, @Surenix, and @kylematthews, without whose help Cydia 1.1.9 would have sucked."

Am I reading that correctly? (1)

gerardrj (207690) | about 7 months ago | (#45775273)

If I follow: the jail-breakers, who want to get out of Apple's walled garden, are complaining that someone is operating outside their own walled garden and allowing software and services the jail-breakers don't approve of to be run on hardware they don't make?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...