Apple Outs Anti-Jailbreak Update 429
Stoobalou writes "Apple has issued an emergency update for devices running the iOS 4 mobile operating system. iOS 4.0.2 plugs the security hole exploited by the iPhone Dev Team to allow pain-free jailbreaking of the iPhone 4 and its manifold siblings as well as... actually, that's about it."
Why does the submitter see this as a bad thing? (Score:5, Insightful)
If jailbreakme can use that exploit then so can someone malicious. Imagine having your phone bricked because you viewed the wrong PDF on some website. The update is a very good thing.
Re:Why does the submitter see this as a bad thing? (Score:5, Interesting)
If jailbreakme can use that exploit then so can someone malicious. Imagine having your phone bricked because you viewed the wrong PDF on some website. The update is a very good thing.
That's true. Although recently jailbreakme got some legal footing about the legality of jail-breaking a phone, the way they did it was an issue, so it's good that the hole was broken.
Another good example, not of bricking a phone, was shown on the UK tv news last night - of an example app on Android being able to record arbitrary audio after performing a similar hack.
So although this says it's anti-jailbreak, that's just secondary - it was one hell of a hole in the first place.
Re:Why does the submitter see this as a bad thing? (Score:4, Interesting)
Thirded. Usually I would say Apple was just trying to keep people from unlocking their phones...but I think that was just a symptom of the problem they were trying to fix here.
Re:Why does the submitter see this as a bad thing? (Score:5, Interesting)
This exploit is the least of their problems ... http://www.sbsfaq.com/?p=2165 [sbsfaq.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
it looks like that is a problem with Exchange, and has nothing to do with the iphone (other than the person who actually took screenshots of the Flash SMS uses an iphone, not surprising given most phones have no way to take screenshots :)
Re: (Score:2)
Although recently jailbreakme got some legal footing about the legality of jail-breaking a phone, the way they did it was an issue, so it's good that the hole was broken.
Was jailbreaking a phone ever prosecuted as an illegal act? I think that ruling by the LoC is a bit overrated.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I would rather have seen a court ruling banning the prevention of jailbreak-type behavior, not just for phones, but for all consumer devices (game consoles, handheld items like e-book readers, etc).
The custom firmware setups for the PSP, for instance, are leaps and bounds ahead of the "official" firmware function-wise. PDF and image reader functions, improved video playback formats that the PSP firmware doesn't have (and in smaller space too), the ability to independently control the processor speed yoursel
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Another good example, not of bricking a phone, was shown on the UK tv news last night - of an example app on Android being able to record arbitrary audio after performing a similar hack.
citation please.
i ask because i really doubt it was a similar hack. most of these so-called android trojans and viruses rely on 1) getting a user to install a non-market app for which they need to have explicitly allowed in their settings and 2) granting the app permissions to do malicious things.
Re:Why does the submitter see this as a bad thing? (Score:4, Interesting)
citation please.
Welcome to Slashdot. We're discussing here. You might find that it's a different than, say, Wikipedia.
Re:Why does the submitter see this as a bad thing? (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly- phrased differently- "A vulnerability actively being exploited in the wild was patched".
Granted, some of those actively exploiting it were the owners of the devices... but hey. You seriously don't know if it was being exploited by others for financial gain. If they were that good, you'd never know. I'm all for patching the vuln.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Just file this under "CmdrTaco Hates Apple." In fact, I propose that as a new hash tag.
Re:Why does the submitter see this as a bad thing? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
> 2010: The Year of the Linux Phone
It is! Android and others!
Re:Why does the submitter see this as a bad thing? (Score:5, Insightful)
In modern parlance, "bricked" means "mildly inconvenienced for about 30 minutes" rather than "made completely inoperable to the point where the hardware is now about as useful as a standard brick" and "zero day" means "sometime within the next 5 years after the actual software was released in the first place."
Re:Why does the submitter see this as a bad thing? (Score:5, Funny)
In modern parlance, "bricked" means "mildly inconvenienced for about 30 minutes" rather than "made completely inoperable to the point where the hardware is now about as useful as a standard brick" and "zero day" means "sometime within the next 5 years after the actual software was released in the first place."
Well, hell hath no fury like a geek who's been mildly inconvenienced.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Even back in the linux router modding days, "brick" was starting to lose its meaning. Someone announced a "de-bricking" technique and it started a whole debate on what "bricked" really meant.
I therefore propose new terminology: "turd" is when you can't fix it with JTAG or similar. You can still build houses out of turds, but it takes a lot more talent and dedication.
Re:Why does the submitter see this as a bad thing? (Score:5, Insightful)
Indeed. And similarly, it was wrong that the original news of the exploit was publicised as a good thing (or, at worst, neutral), rather than being publicised as a major security hole (like you know they would have had it have been something like Internet Explorer).
Of course, it is a problem that you need to jailbreak an Iphone to enable basic functionality. But if the media has such a problem with that, maybe they could actually focus on that instead of praising Apple all the time, or conflating the issue with security exploits; or maybe give some coverage to the more popular platforms (Symbian, RIM, Android) that don't need to be jailbroken, instead of the overwhelming coverage of Apple all the time.
Re:Why does the submitter see this as a bad thing? (Score:5, Funny)
Of course, it is a problem that you need to jailbreak an Iphone to enable basic functionality. But if the media has such a problem with that, maybe they could actually focus on that instead of praising Apple all the time
They're afraid of being modded down.
Re:Why does the submitter see this as a bad thing? (Score:4, Interesting)
I thought android phones needed to be "rooted". Double standard much?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Some Android phones. And if you have a dev bootloader (ie. the folks you bought your phone from aren't assholes), there aren't any security exploits involved in the process anywhere.
Also, the set of things you can do on an Android phone without root is substantially larger than the set of things you can do on a non-jailbroken iPhone (replacing the built-in apps, for instance).
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Some Android phones. And if you have a dev bootloader (ie. the folks you bought your phone from aren't assholes), there aren't any security exploits involved in the process anywhere.
Also, the set of things you can do on an Android phone without root is substantially larger than the set of things you can do on a non-jailbroken iPhone (replacing the built-in apps, for instance).
- Even Google's own Nexus One needs to be rooted [lifehacker.com].
- Replacing the bootloader similarly isn't easy to begin with and not getting any easier either : "DroidX bootloader locked tight [droiddog.com]." And it will only get worse now Google itself is out of the handset game.
- The most popular Android phones come with undeletable crapware [latimes.com].
I want to like Android, I really do, but it doesn't help that most of the things people say about it are half-truths at best.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
androids don't "need" to be rooted unless your particular phone company disables functionality that you want to use. The most relevant example of this is tethering, most phone companies will only enable it after you agree to pay $xx/month more for the privilege to use functionality your phone has native support for.
That said, I've never owned an iPhone so I don't know what you gain by jailbreaking it.
Re:Why does the submitter see this as a bad thing? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Why does the submitter see this as a bad thing? (Score:5, Interesting)
A rooted Android phone is almost always still decently secure, and usually the rooting process involves something with adb, something a Dalvik VM app will be hard pressed to get unless it asks for permissions.
Say a piece of malware gets downloaded from Google's Marketplace. The su app pops up asking, "hey, the Vomitron Toaster app wants root privs?" Anyone with a clue is going to tick "no" and "remember this decision". In a couple hours after the app gets flagged, Google fires off the kill switch and the app gets zapped from the store and phones.
Rooting gives one more functionality, but it doesn't significantly add functionality to a device like an IOS JB does.
Here is the funny thing. If I want a command line shell to do stuff on a phone, Android is easy -- download a terminal app. The iPhone, I need to do the following:
1: JB the device. /etc/sshd/sshd_config to only allow access via RSA key, and disallow root access.
2: Hunt down "MobileTerminal 426", the Debian package.
3: Get on a wireless network.
4: Enable OpenSSH.
5: ssh into phone, change root and mobile password to something respectable (20+ characters.)
6: scp the Debian package and install it.
7: Install sudo from Cydia and configure it so I don't need to type in the insanely long password when I want root access.
8: Edit
9: Make sure the sshd is turned off in SBSettings unless it is needed. It will turn back on after a reboot.
All this so I can have full command line access to my iPhone and a method of copying files to and from the filesystem without restriction. The reason why I do the gymnastics with sshd as opposed to uninstalling it is so I can sftp in.
To boot, the only command line terminal app [1] that works on the iPhone (the Terminal app in Cydia is not iOS4 compatible and crashes on startup) doesn't seem to have the ability to do control keys other than control-C. Of course, I wonder if I can just use a normal app and ssh to loopback, but so far, that hasn't worked unless the device is on a Wi-Fi network.
Personally, if someone can make a good terminal emulator and put it on Cydia, I'd pay $5-$10 for it. Especially if it has an easy mechanism for doing control and meta keys, so if I feel insane enough to run emacs, I can.
[1]: A true terminal app that uses a shell and such. There are apps for ssh and such, but those don't have access to the whole phone's filesystem, and I doubt they would get approved if they had the ability to do so.
Re: (Score:2)
Be fair - its "advanced" functionality that comes with a modest but non-zero set of additional responsibilities for the user, along with a moderate amount of additional power. If it was truly "basic functionality" then there wouldn't be many millions of people quite successfully and happily using their devices without it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
If you think jailbreaking is necessary to enable "basic functionality" on an iPhone, I'd love to see what your definition of basic functionality is. I think you meant to write "advanced and technical functionality that relatively few people really need [want]." While I don't have an iPhone, I have an iPod Touch that I use constantly for school, work, and fun. After jailbreaking it to see what the hype was about
Re: (Score:2)
I just wish that Apple would put a mechanism in similar to what Android has in place where apps can go validate they are licensed to run on the device, and if not, don't run, or point the user to the App Store to buy a licensed copy. This way, the security of apps won't be reliant on keeping users from JB-ing their devices.
With Google's new API to check if an app is licensed, pirates have to hack each app, one by one, in order to get them working on unauthorized phones. Maybe Apple can follow suit, so peo
Re:Why does the submitter see this as a bad thing? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
THis is the one thing that at least has me tempted to jailbreak my iPhone.
Beyond that...there's nothing on the "Unapproved App Store" that I remotely give a shit about. But thats just me.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. And similarly, it was wrong that the original news of the exploit was publicised as a good thing (or, at worst, neutral), rather than being publicised as a major security hole (like you know they would have had it have been something like Internet Explorer).
This is Apple news, it's always a cause for whining. Jailbreak ? OMG HAX, it's the end the world! Security update ? OMG, evil Apple want to stop users taking control of their device.
Of course, it is a problem that you need to jailbreak an Iphone to enable basic functionality.
This is bullshit, basic functionality ? You gain the ability to run unsigned, unapproved software. A locked iPhone will do the same as any locked smartphone.
But if the media has such a problem with that, maybe they could actually focus on that instead of praising Apple all the time, or conflating the issue with security exploits
The media praise Apple all the time ? This is bullshit on the same order as the "liberal media." It's confirmation bias: you get annoyed by stories that you perceive as pro-
Re:Why does the submitter see this as a bad thing? (Score:4, Insightful)
What basic functionality?
Tethering? The phone already does that, without jailbreaking. Installing non-app store apps? I wouldn't call that basic - the phone is just not designed and promoted to work that way (ie, if you want to do other things with it, you're moving away from 'basic' and into 'unsupported, potentially advanced' functions).
The biggest reason I've seen for jailbreaking my phone (although I haven't done so) is to enable use of the phone as an AP, rather than having to tether to my Powerbook and then share my wifit that way, but the number of times I've needed to share my connection when there's been nothing but 3G access is limited. Either way, that's hardly basic functionality.
I guess VoIP is verging on basic, but there are apps that work over wifi - the 3G restrictions are carrier based.
I agree that this exploit has been spun the wrong way - as a positive thing to enable easy jailbreaking. Any security hole is never a positive thing, regardless of the beneficial things you can do with it. I'm glad it has been addressed, although I am hoping it will also be fixed for users of 2G and 3G iPhones who haven;t upgraded to iOS4.
Re:Why does the submitter see this as a bad thing? (Score:4, Interesting)
I have found a few reasons for jailbreaking - and I used Jailbreakme to break it. The first is backgrounding Apps. Apple, in their "brilliance", decided to limit this to just the iPhone 3GS and the iPhone 4. I can now run Pandora in background on my iPhone 3G. Second are things that add or compete with Apple apps. Being able to download files in Safari is a huge thing. So are running ports of VLC that allow me to play files other than in the crazy resolution and .h264 that Apple requires - i can now play MPEGs as well as a few other formats. Another app I have lets me download youtube videos. Sure, I can fire up my PC, use firefox and flashgot, pull the videos, run them MediaCoder or Adobe Meida Encoder, import them into iTunes then sync my iPhone, but this is way more convienent.
Why the media doesn't dig deep on the iPhone (Score:2, Insightful)
But if the media has such a problem with that, maybe they could actually focus on that instead of praising Apple all the time, or conflating the issue with security exploits; or maybe give some coverage to the more popular platforms (Symbian, RIM, Android) that don't need to be jailbroken, instead of the overwhelming coverage of Apple all the time.
With the exception of right wing political media that get together for weekly talking points, "The Media" doesn't collude together for a common focus. Most reporters know next-to-nothing about the beat they cover unless it is a personal passion, and expecting them to dig deep is incredibly naive, especially in a time like today when a skeleton crew covers virtually everything.
You have people like Engadget saying "hooray, we can root our iPhones!" and you have people like CNet saying "iPhones are hot
Re:Why does the submitter see this as a bad thing? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's amazing that slashdot can spin this as anything other than a good thing. Bottom line – the phone had a serious security vulnerability that allowed people to brick/use the phone for various nefarious tasks. Apple fixed it, spinning this as anything other than an important bug fix is downright irresponsible.
Re: (Score:2)
Where is the "Obvious" mod thing when you need it? I think it was pretty clear and obvious that any exploit that originates from outside needs to be patched and fast. That was the first thing I thought when the jailbreak web page was announced.
Here's what gets me though -- it really took a frightening amount of time for that one to get patched and released. I expected a week or less and it was longer than expected. But I have to say that this puts Apple's OS at least on par with Windows and, quite frank
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine having your phone bricked because you viewed the wrong PDF on some website.
Imagine a world where you don't have to break into your own device.
Re:Why does the submitter see this as a bad thing? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is a massively publicized remote exploit. That is the most critical sort of security issue for an operating system. There is nothing strange about them prioritizing it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
WHAT? The real security issue is that a website could own your device.
Relax. Take a deep breath. I'll wait. If you're ready now, I'll explain.
You said: Once they do that, these vulnerabilities will no longer have a beneficial side to them
I'm sorry, but what the heck are you talking about? I can think of a ton of vulnerabilities that would have a "beneficial" side to them. Say, for instance, a website were to install a key logger and capture all your passwords...
That was my fault for writing an ambiguous sentence. I should have said, "Once Apple gives control of the phone to the users, these vulnerabilities will no longer have a beneficial side to iPhone owners."
The exploits are a bad thing, I agree with you. However, since they currently have a legitimate use with a beneficial value to owners, there's an active incentive to keep phones unpatched and to delay updating when new firmware is
Re:Already an issue.. (Score:5, Informative)
The problematic part is that iPhone 2G users won't get an update but are still susceptible to this bug, so they're SOL. Additionally, iOS 4 sucks on the iPhone 3G (nearly no new features, but much slower), so many are reluctant to update.
Re:Already an issue.. (Score:5, Informative)
iOS 4 sucks on the iPhone 3G (nearly no new features, but much slower), so many are reluctant to update.
iOS4 doesn't suck on the 3G if you do a clean wipe of the OS before moving to 4. This has been a known issue for some time now. Wipe your 3G, then move to iOS4. I know plenty of folks running iOS4 on their 3G who absolutely love it. They have no issues with performance or it suck-ing. If you upgraded and already experience performance issues, backup your phone, restore to factory settings, upgrade to iOS4, then restore from backup. Problem solved.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
iOS 4 sucks on the iPhone 3G (nearly no new features, but much slower), so many are reluctant to update.
iOS4 doesn't suck on the 3G if you do a clean wipe of the OS before moving to 4. This has been a known issue for some time now. Wipe your 3G, then move to iOS4. I know plenty of folks running iOS4 on their 3G who absolutely love it. They have no issues with performance or it suck-ing. If you upgraded and already experience performance issues, backup your phone, restore to factory settings, upgrade to iOS4, then restore from backup. Problem solved.
From personal experience, this doesn't do anything to fix the problem - it will come back after restoring from the backup.
disable smartsearch (Score:3, Informative)
if you disable most of the smart search functionality, it speeds up considerably, but is still not as fast as the 3.0 OS.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No, they can't. The 3.2 series is only for the iPad, and doesn't exist for any iPhone/iPod. The 3.2.2 update does fix the vulnerability, but only iPad users can install it.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No, 3.2.x is iPad-only.
No update for older iPhone and iPod Touch... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The evil "jailbreak vendors who say you shouldn't upgrade" (term used by F-Secure) have stated that they will be releasing a fix for the exploit on the iPod Touch 1G and the iPhone 2G. Ironically, this means that all owners of such devices MUST now jailbreak unless they want to be vulnerable to this exploit forever.
McAfee? Symantec? You seriously expect them to do something useful instead of whining about how Apple doesn't let them write software to hog down your phones even more?
Re:No update for older iPhone and iPod Touch... (Score:5, Interesting)
Yup, already out for testing [iphone-dev.org].
Thu Aug 12 15:20:25 unknown MobileSafari[421] : MS:Notice: Loading: /Library/MobileSubstrate/DynamicLibraries/PDFPatch_CVE-2010-1797.dylib
[...]
Thu Aug 12 15:20:56 unknown MobileSafari[421] : Prevented PDF Exploit
Thu Aug 12 15:20:56 unknown MobileSafari[421] : FT_Load_Glyph failed: glyph 1: error 130.
Thu Aug 12 15:20:56 unknown UIKitApplication:com.apple.mobilesafari[0xc4c][421] : Thu Aug 12 15:20:56 iphone MobileSafari[421] : FT_Load_Glyph failed: glyph 1: error 130.
And suddenly jailbreaking is the smart security option for all the users that Apple left behind.
Re: (Score:2)
And suddenly jailbreaking is the smart security option for all the users that Apple left behind.
Isn't that the general rule of thumb for devices once they reach the end of support - do all the fun hacky stuff that you want, and if you break it you end up with an excuse to upgrade :P
Re:No update for older iPhone and iPod Touch... (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe McAfee or Symantec will have a solution.
nah, I think the vulnerability is bad enough...you're not hoping it would get WORSE, do you?
Re: (Score:2)
Cellphones. (Score:3, Insightful)
There are a million of them. Why not buy one you don't have to jailbreak?
Bet it'd be cheaper too.
Re:Cellphones. (Score:5, Insightful)
I can think of a few reasons:
There are probably many other reasons. Personally I do not have any kind of smartphone - they are all too big for me. But I do have an iPod touch, and the software is very slick - though strangely it is not a great MP3 player :)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You forgot a huge reason.
You bought DRM'ed media from Apple in the past and Apple won't let you play it on their competitors' devices.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I can think of a few reasons:
That's a stupid reason, grow a god damn backbone.
If your friends kill themselves, wil you too?
You need to feel like you are part of an "in" crowd.
Even more ridiculous, only feeble minded people buy for that reason, and those people tend to be idiots.
The others are more or less valid, but still make it seem like a crappy platform
Re: (Score:2)
I can think of one reason [slashdot.org].
(kidding)
Bummer (Score:3, Funny)
Now we're going to have to wait a week before another exploit is released publicly. Shucks.
In their defense... (Score:2, Insightful)
...while the exploit is only used (that we know of) for the jailbreak at this point, it could potentially be used for much worse...to wait for the next more substantial update to patch the exploit would be careless on Apple's part.
Re: (Score:2)
...while the exploit is only used (that we know of) for the jailbreak at this point, it could potentially be used for much worse...to wait for the next more substantial update to patch the exploit would be careless on Apple's part.
If the good guys know about an exploit the bad guys have probably been exploiting it for a while. I miss the good old days when a virus just meant your hard drive was hosed.
Oh for shame! (Score:5, Funny)
We have to go back to jailbreaking the old fashioned way with a computer and a USB cable - it'll take ten minutes rather than five now and require you to RTFM. And all because Apple wants to fix a gaping security hole. DAMN THEE DRACONIAN STEVE JOBS!!1!
Re: (Score:2)
You do realize that this is currently the only way to jailbreak on an iPhone 4 and newer iPhone 3GS, right? Unless you have SHSHs on file and can therefore downgrade to 4.0.1 (and subsequently use jailbreakme), you're stuck without a jailbreak for now.
Re: (Score:2)
They patched both the kernel vulnerability and the PDF exploit, so yes, it's patched for good. Even if they only patched the PDF exploit, there's no other way to deliver the jailbreak to a 3GS or 4 anyway. You need both a way to run userland code on the phone and an exploit to get into the kernel.
Security Holes & Closed Platforms (Score:4, Interesting)
Who's up for a virus that can't be removed by the user once it's in? How about a friendly bugger that takes advantage of your contact list? For that matter, let's bring back the old dialer viruses and have your phone call a 10$/minute hotline every night for an hour.
Re: (Score:2)
I am curious as to how much longer we will go until the next security hole isn't used so benevolently.
Who's up for a virus that can't be removed by the user once it's in? How about a friendly bugger that takes advantage of your contact list? For that matter, let's bring back the old dialer viruses and have your phone call a 10$/minute hotline every night for an hour.
You mean like the recent Android SMS trojan [slashdot.org] ? We're actually pretty lucky to have guys like the dev-team around hunting for bugs. Keeps Apple on their toes and the found vulnerabilities get patched.
no mister Bond, I expect you to file chapter 11! (Score:2)
That has something to say about our society's priorities, and I don't think any of it is good.
The best part (Score:5, Informative)
Apple has not released the fix for the iPod Touch 1G and the iPhone 2G, so the iPhone Dev Team themselves are working on a fix [iphone-dev.org] that will work on all devices. So you'll be able to basically jailbreak and then plug the hole that was used to do it.
Performance fix? (Score:2)
So this doesnt address the performance issues many ipod-touch/3g owners have been experiencing?
Re: (Score:2)
Fix is supposedly coming in iOS 4.1 though I've heard resetting network settings to factory default and doing a hard reboot helps in some cases.
It doesn't help the passwords are well known (Score:2, Interesting)
I still am amazed that Apple releases the iPhone code with simple, easy to discover passwords that are the same across every device. That is UNIX rule 101 - "protect root". Knowing the password means that if you can execute arbitrary code on the iPhone via any means, you can su to root and break out of the user space security protection. User priviledge controls have been the basis of UNIX security for as long as UNIX has been around (as it has been for most OSs to more or less a degree)
If the iPhone had
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You can't su to root. There is no su on a stock iPhone. The privilege escalation from the PDF exploit was accomplished using a kernel vulnerability, not su.
The passwords mean nothing until you jailbreak and actually put a reasonable UNIX userland on the phone.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Yes.
# dpkg-query -S /bin/su /bin/su
coreutils-bin:
coreutils-bin is a jailbreak package.
It does. The deb dependency chain is cydia -> essential -> dpkg -> coreutils-bin. Stock iPhones have very little of the standard UNIX/BSD filesystem and utilities left.
No you can't, because nothing on
Jailbreaking vs. SIM lock (Score:5, Insightful)
I wouldn't be jailbreaking my iPhone if there was a way to remove SIM lock. Right now Apple & AT&T has forced me into a situation where AT&T won't provide unlock code (asks to go some unlock shop and pay for the unlock) and Apple doesn't really care. Only option is to jailbreak to get blacksn0w running.
If Steve/government (in many countries in Europe it is mandated that after contract period unlock key is given) would force AT&T to provide unlock codes for everyone out of contract then most of the jailbreaking business would go away.
Re: (Score:2)
These days I mostly jailbrean when I can to ensure I have the ability to downgrade the phone in the future. They've released far too many buggy versions to be at the mercy of Apple's whim as to if I can downgrade again.
The issue is a bit overblown (Score:2)
1. These sorts of exploits are found for every device all the time. This one was just famous because people used it to get root access to their own phone.
2. @comex et al are not immediately irresponsible and evil for exploiting and exposing a vulnerability. Isn't that what DEFCON and BlackHat devote entire conventions to?
3. If Apple just provided a safe way to get root access to your own device (like every other computer you've ever purchased) people wouldn't have to resort to using security holes.
4. With t
That's all it does? (Score:2)
And yet the activesync lock-up remains....
Article misleading? (Score:2)
Doesn't this update just patch the PDF exploit and not the other methodologies used by Dev-Team to jailbreak? And wasn't the PDF exploit developed by someone not on the Dev-Team? I'll gladly stand corrected if this is not true, but I thought I read this somewhere.
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
actually... (Score:2)
the hole plugged that stops some jailbreak from working could be exploited via malicious guys on the net to own your device via a hosted PDF. which isn't cool.
Error: Not just iOS4, also iPhone OS 3 (Score:3, Insightful)
The main article states that iOS4 is updated. That is incorrect.
iOS 3x, or more correctly "iPhone OS 3" has also been updated in order to remove the flaw from iPads.
- Jesper
Patches for Jailbreakers (Score:3, Informative)
For jailbreakers who want to be safe and keep their jailbreak, search for "PDF Loading Warner" in the Cydia store. It's a pop-up that will warn you if Safari is attempting to load a PDF, so you can cancel it if you're not expecting to be viewing a PDF.
For iPhone 2G and iPod Touch 1G users, there's no Apple-approved solution to the PDF exploit.
The jailbreak community is working on an actual PDF patch to fix the exploit. This could be the only solution for iPhone 2G/iPod Touch 1G users, to jailbreak their device and install the patch.
It's in test phase now, but you can get a copy: http://twitter.com/saurik/status/20958834996 [twitter.com]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why buy a device that you cannot control?
Because you can't control the close substitutes that are being sold either. For example, all three major video game consoles are like iPhones in that they need to be jailbroken to run anything interesting [wiibrew.org].
Re: (Score:2)
What about the GamePark holdings' handhelds? They run lots of cool stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
What about the GamePark holdings' handhelds? They run lots of cool stuff.
I saw zero ads in TV or print for the GP2X or GP2X Wiz. Is there anything that A. runs lots of cool stuff, B. is marketed to the general public in the United States, and C. isn't tied to a $1,500 cell phone plan? As far as I can tell, it's pick any two: iPod Touch is B and C, GP2X is A and C, and Android phones are A and B.
Re: (Score:2)
"Because you can't control the close substitutes that are being sold either."
N900.
FOSS phone with nokia reliability, root access and software available from debian-like repositories with a nice GUI. WIN.
(OK, it's not as slim or pretty as an iPhone, but it rocks in terms or functionality)
Sorry, we don't have any of those (Score:2)
N900.
On May 15, 2010, I visited a Best Buy store, a RadioShack store, and a T-Mobile store in my home town. None of the three stores had this Nokia handset in stock. Google nokia n900 fort wayne indiana didn't appear to turn up anything either. Nor have I seen it advertised in print or on television anywhere near the extent that iPhone has been.
Re: (Score:2)
gaming consoles don't usually know your phone number, your contacts, your e-mail
Your Xbox 360 console knows all these if you routinely use Xbox Live Gold. Your Live account is associated with an e-mail address, and Gold subscribers have Skype and a list of gaming contacts. Even a Wii console knows your contacts' Wii Numbers.
a device that has the sole purpose of playing video games.
What sole purpose? Look at U.S. PS3 commercials that claim the console only does everything [playstation.com]. Besides, it wouldn't be as much of a sole purpose if the platform were more open. For example, once the Nintendo DS got reliably cracked, a media player called MoonShell and
Re: (Score:2)
I still it is an important question. Despite your cynicism.
[Why not have a script that just cynically comments 'I am so clever I have seen it all before' on every article.]
Re: (Score:2)
Cry me a river, try being a Kindle advocate.
Hey, did you know you can backup your Kindle downloads to your computer? YES REALLY. Every fricken time.
And that's just one of many constant misconceptions.
Kindle backup 1984 (Score:2)
Hey, did you know you can backup your Kindle downloads to your computer? YES REALLY. Every fricken time.
A Google search for kindle backup 1984 brought up this page [consumerist.com], which claims that even after you have restored a backup, if Amazon has removed a book for alleged copyright infringement, it may delete the copy that you just restored the moment you turn wireless back on.
Re:Outing the update (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
So, they're metrosexual then.
Re:Outing the update (Score:5, Insightful)
It isn't just anti-jailbreak, it's patching a pretty serious security flaw.
Re:Outing the update (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Outing the update (Score:5, Insightful)
We paid for the phone, we should be able to use it how we see fit.
Actually, no, you didn't pay for the phone, at least not all of it. You paid $200, and AT&T paid more to Apple as a subsidy.
It's still a sale and not a lease. They fact that the sale price is subsidized via the sale of another product (2 year service contract) does not make it any less of a sale. If you buy a burrito and a bag of chips, the drink is only 25 cents. If you apply for a Macy's credit card, you get additional 40% off your purchase.
I'm sure I'm in the /. minority on this, but I really don't see the big deal about getting an unlocked phone in the US. They're not currently available from Apple, but if they were they'd cost about $600, based on what they sell for in Canada, and you're not entitled to have the iPhone you paid $200 for (subsidized) unlocked, so some questions:
You are confusing subsidized vs unlocked. They are 2 different things. I thought you could already get it unsubsidized, but not unlocked (at least in the U.S.).
Why would I want any "smartphone" without a data plan? What's the point? If that was my goal I'd go back to an iPod and a cheap Nokia
I don't know why you would want it, but that's not the point. One could still use it as a Wifi device with VoIP capabilities, etc. You may want to use it on T-Mobile, or get a plan from Canada, or sell it / give it to someone else from another country.
The only other carrier in the US is T-Mobile, but apparently they use some different frequencies and not everything works right, so I need AT&T anyway.
No you don't - 3G frequencies are different. Voice and 2G are the same.
Since I need a dataplan ($15 or $25 a month from AT&T), why would I pay $400 more for the unlocked phone, which amortized over 24 months is $16.67 a month?
Again, you are confusing subsidized vs unlocked.
The sense of entitlement by a lot of people is becoming increasingly disturbing. You want the iPhone 4 unlocked, but you don't (I assume) want to pay the full price for it, and you want the government to step in and tell AT&T / Apple to unlock a subsidized phone. Whatever. You are not entitled to an unlocked iPhone for $200.
Besides the "entitlement" argument, I agree with your point there - I am not convinced the government should step in.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I pay AT&T $200 and sign a 2 year contract ($~75/month). It is not $200 only, the cost is amortized over the period of the contract.
I cannot break that contract without legal recourse from AT&T. Why does AT&T have additional entitlement?
If I want/need to move to another carrier, I should be able to do so by paying the surrender value for the remainder of the contract, and take my working phone and my number to another carrier of my choice.
AT&T looses nothing,
Re:Outing the update (Score:4, Informative)
On the other hand, you can get phones on contract. This involves signing up for a specified number of months, and possibly paying something up front. In this case, you're buying the phone, however you're essentially buying it on credit and paying it off over 12-24 months. In this case (at least over here) the phones generally come unlocked, so you can move to a different network if you wish, but you'll still have to pay your contract's monthly fee, even if you don't use the network.
In the latter case, I feel it's perfectly fair to consider the phone to belong to the customer. They've paid for it, and the service.
The other difference between the US and the UK is this ridiculous notion of crippled phones - over here, they might sometimes be locked to a network to cover the subsidy, but I've never had one which has had features deliberately disabled by the network which is what preventing you rooting the device basically amounts to.
Re: (Score:2)
Taco hasn't trolled Apple in a few days. This one is fairly obvious and uninspired, so let it slide.