Fake Your Own .Mac Server

c13v3rm0nk3y writes "A clever fellow named Otto Moerbeek has publish a short article on getting an OpenBSD box to emulate a .Mac server. Using Apache/DAV/SSL and a roll a duct-tape, he describes how you can get most .Mac functionality without paying Apple for it." This is useful because then you can use apple's backup tools to backup to a local server, and not have to backup over your piddly internet connection.

Comments

I wonder..

[Suppafly]

I wonder how many comments will get posted here before Apple cease and desists them.

Magic Number

[Inthewire]

According to the article you need to configure your server to return trialAccountDaysLeft = -1 How long before Apple changes that variable name, or obfuscates it somehow?

Re:Irresponsible?

[Kalak]

This isn't condoning the use of software without paying for it, it's giving a user a choice of "vendors" including users being a vendor themselves. If this were Microsoft that were being run-around, you'd probably say that it'd be a great thing. By Apple using open standards (the kind of thing /. has been clamoring vendors to do for ages now), they are allowing this as an option.

Apple has a feature built into their OS. If you like that feature, you have to:
1. Pay for their hardware
2. Pay for their OS
3. Find a service to use for .Mac.

It's not like they're not getting any money in the deal here. Last I heard #1 & #2 were how Apple has been making it's bread & butter for years now. I'm glad Apple has let this happen, since I don't want to back up my notebook over a slow connection and rely on their server. I'd rather use a LAN, my server and my tape drive to provide extra backups. That's part of the reason I bought OS X. (read: Paid Apple Money for the software.)

How about this

[Chanc_Gorkon]

I am more interested in figuring out how to make a PC (Linux, Windows or whatever) appear as a mac to .Mac. Of course the other way is cool too! :)

Re:We need more fake servers

[Glytch]

It won't be IM. Anyone who wants to roll their own for that will just use Jabber. It'll probably be some kind of Palladium server clone that will authenticate everything instead of just what you're supposed to see. Then you'll really see some cease-and-desist letters fly, if not outright DMCA-sanctioned arrests.

O'Reilly Did It First

[WatertonMan]

Actually O'Reilly had a set of instructions for putting together something like a .Mac server quite a while ago. Admittedly it wasn't as comprehensive in mimicking .mac as this article is. But a lot of the functionality was the same.

The fact is that a lot of people want .Mac functionality but with a little bit more control on their part. I think that Apple may initially fight this but eventually will be forced to allow user controlled .Mac servers. Hell, perhaps they'll see it as an opportunity and sell a XServe.Mac.

Apple should put .mac features ing MacOS X Server

[benwaggoner]

There are lots of neat things that .mac does (I paid my $50), but it'd be great if I could do them locally. Backup is a HUGE one - 100Base-T is a lot better than DSL! But being able to use the pretty slick webmail for my own mail domain would be very useful as well, instead of having to forward to my mac.com address. Local iCal would be very nice as well.

I can certainly understand why Apple doesn't want to make these available everywhere for free, but it'd be great if MacOS X Server 10.3 or whatever made it possible to provide some .mac services to my local users. Sure, there are variety of ways to hack it together, but if it all "just worked" that'd be better yet.

This would certainly give me a reason to pay $1K to upgrade from the 10.1.5 server I'm running right now.

And on an unrelated note, 10.3 REALLY should include a graphical DNS admin. It's really jarring to have all these great, simple controls for the whole server experience, except DNS. Webmin works, but still, that's hardly the MacOS X vision!