Slashdot Mirror


Xbox Auto-Update Blocks Linux Usage

An anonymous reader writes "According to The Inquirer, Microsoft has used their Xbox Live Vole System to patch any Xboxes that access it....without asking their permission before installing the software. However, in this occurrence, the bug appears to be the 'dashboard bug' that allows Linux to be easily installed on an Xbox. Further, according to The Xbox Linux Project, users who do not have an Xbox Live account may find themselves being patched without permission as well. If a gamer tries to access any part of a game that uses Xbox Live, the console can 'phone home' and install the patches anyway. While patching bugs can be a nice touch to poor software, I don't know if I feel comfortable with ANYONE installing software on my hardware without asking permission first."

27 of 702 comments (clear)

  1. Groundbreaking suggestion by Amsterdam+Vallon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Don't buy an X-BOX!

    --

    Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate. Ex-O'Reilly/MIT employee, now a full-time Google employee.
    1. Re:Groundbreaking suggestion by ckaminski · · Score: 4, Insightful

      except, all you people buying Xboxes thinking you're chewing into Microsoft's bottom line are deluding yourself.

      Every Xbox sold gets to be another point in their lineup. It's their grand scheme for putting Sony and Nintendo out of business. Dump hardware on the market so everyone buys it, and get lock-in.

      You'd screw them more buy not buying an Xbox at all.

  2. Any serious Linux users... by mpeg4codec · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you bought an Xbox to run Linux, you'd have no reason to install Xbox-Live. If you bought an Xbox to run games, it's unlikely that you'd want to run Linux on it. After all, you can find better X86 hardware cheaper at Fry's Electronics, or your local bargain store.

    I know there's a camp that uses it for both, and it's rather large. However, you should probably consider just buying another computer for that sort of thing.

  3. Why the suprise? by mao+che+minh · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Listen, when you choose to use a Microsoft product you are doing so under the assumption that you are giving away a great deal of your rights, that you are contributing to a monopoly and any parties that have the ability to gain from that, and that you are about to lose a lot of control over your own system/property. This well-written-in-EULA-but-hardly-mentioned-aloud-ag reement is no secret. In some cases, in certain interpretations, this can be a good thing: like automatic patches for security vulnerabilities. However, there are many reasons why such intrusive behavior - regardless of motive - is bad.

    Overall, I would say that such a willing loss of control, freedom, and some can even argue morals, is good for the home desktop/console market at large (though it is alarming to realize that software console could be so badly written that it would demand security updates). For the corporate setting, such a sacrifice is unacceptable and even hazardous - as the article mentions.

    The underlying sentiment of the article, the editors here, and a large population of Slashdot is that "Microsoft is behaving badly - Linux is good". I agree with this sentiment and philosophy, but only to a certain degree. Microsoft Windows is an extremely well established desktop operating system with very mature gaming technologies. For this reason, I feel that it should remain the home desktop choice. As a server operating system or workstation operating system, I feel that it costs companies too much, is too closed, is too insecure, is not flexible enough, and most importantly, is not powerful enough. The entire business ethic and development model of Microsoft is so painfully harmful to large businesses that it's laughable.

    Bottom line: If you willingly use a Microsoft product, don't be suprised when they bend you over: they have been doing to everyone for years. Linux should prevail on your servers and workstations, Windows should prevail at home, for basic common sense reason and moral justifications.

    1. Re:Why the suprise? by someguy456 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In some cases, in certain interpretations, this can be a good thing: like automatic patches for security vulnerabilities. However, there are many reasons why such intrusive behavior - regardless of motive - is bad.


      Not trying to defend M$ or anything, but when you put it that way I guess they really are just trying to secure the xbox. After all, it _is_ being hacked.
    2. Re:Why the suprise? by AlexMax2742 · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Weird. Thing is, I didn't buy my Xbox to run Linux. You can install Linux on it if you want, but if Microsoft doesn't want you to use their Xbox Live service without having a legitimate Xbox that they know hasn't been modified (for better or for worse), it's their decision. And another challenge for you. Perhaps you can figure out a way to circumvent that too and be able to use both.

      People figured out how to make the Xbox do something it wasn't designed to do. Microsoft has taken the stance that it doesn't want that happening on their systems, especially when you consider the fact that with Xbox Live factored into the equation, and that this might open the door for cheaters to ruin online game, hell Just look at SOCOM. Don't you usually patch your games for better online play? If you play online, you need to patch the structure to make sure nothing sneaky has comprimised the games. If you dont want to, you just choose not to install Live! It's that simple. Xbox Live! and Xbox itself are intertwined. They both need updating or else the weak link breaks the system.

      Microsoft has made its move. Now its your turn. Either circumvent it or give up. But jesus chrsit quit whining about how evil Microsofts intentions are.

      --
      I'm the guy with the unpopular opinion
  4. Do you have to sign an EULA to use an XBox? by JoeShmoe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Totally serious question...does the XBox come with any kind of EULA? Like a seal over the power button saying you agree or an included pamphlet?

    If not...then wouldn't this be unauthorized access to a computing device, which was made a federal crime I thought in the last round of Justice Department power grabbing?

    We all know about the quasi-legal nature of software granting itself the right to phone home or take action against your system, but that relies on the arguement the user accepted the EULA to use the software. What about hardware?

    The last console I owned was a Super Nintendo so I just don't know, do modern consoles have EULAs?

    - JoeShmoe
    .

    --
    -- I wonder which will go down in history as the bigger failure: the War on Drugs or the War on Filesharing
    1. Re:Do you have to sign an EULA to use an XBox? by Alsee · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You bought the DVD player, you own the hardware. You don't own the software

      Incorrect.

      According to US law you are the legal owner of that particular copy. The law is quite clear about the ownership of particular copies being seperate from holding a copyright. It is the reason used bookstores and used CD stores and used computer games are legal. When you buy the medium a copy is stored on you are the owner of that particular copy. Amongst other things that means that you have the right to sell it, and you have the right not to have that copy disrupted by anyone.

      APEX people are free to support or NOT support any feature they want, it's their software.

      They are certainly free to support or not support anything they like. But once they sell it that hardware and that particular copy of software is no longer their property. They cannot legally do anything to someone else's property without permission.

      unsupported thing that they decided to remove in later versions.

      That's fine, they are perfectly free to can sell a new version. Buy they have no right to touch MY copy.

      Your analogy to a car coming back without the radio is ridiculous.

      No it isn't, but I'll change the example if you like. You buy a car with a custom paint job, some sort of art work. Ohh, lets say it's artwork of angels and flowers and bunny rabbits. You bring it in for an oil change and it comes back with a new paintjob. This time it's demons and strippers. By your logic that is perfectly fine since they painted it in the first place and they are the copyright holder on that artwork.

      (Note: if you'd actually preffer a car with demons and strippers over angels and flowers then reverse the exaple, they painted over your cool demons with fluffy bunny rabbits)

      But it's hardly illegal

      Hopefully the artwork example makes it crystal clear that it is completely illegal. If you still dissagree then you need to explain away the car/artwork situation.

      credit card company to agree with you

      It wasn't me, I was just saying that person was right. Going through the credit card company was good thinking, much easier than draging them through small claims court.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  5. Re:what? by Keighvin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The console itself is purchased, not the right to *use* the console under a predetermined licensing agreement.

    Now the software is entirely a different issue - some games may indeed try to force an EULA on you upon purchase to allow such activities (which would become a sticky situation when renting), or enrollment into the XBOX Live system, but the hardware itself is yours to keep and do whatever you want to.

    --
    Any spoon would be too big.
  6. Re:what? by sean.m.bober · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I really wish that I could mod this down to a -1 Troll. It IS his hardware. He paid for it. He owns it. He didn't design it. However, it is his. You did not design the car you drive. But, onece paid for, it IS yours. Ford doesn't come to your house in the middle of the night and rotate your tires for you do they? Better yet, if there is a major flaw with your car they don't come out and fix it in the middle of the night like a bunch of friendly little elves. They send you a notice and then you have to give them permission to fix it by actually responding to the notice (by brining your car in).

  7. If you mod it, stay off of their network... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...it's like a truck. I can put 70" tires on it and turn it into a monster truck without anyone stopping me. But when I put it on the government's network (the highway), they can enforce their laws on my truck (i.e. you can't drive around in something that can crush every car on the road)...

    If you mod your x-box...fine. If some MS goons break into your house and restore your x-box to the factory default, you have something to complain about. If you expect to play on MS's network with your modded x-box without any consequences, you're a fucking moron.

  8. What am I missing here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Further, according to The Xbox Linux Project, users who do not have an Xbox Live account may find themselves being patched without permission as well. If a gamer tries to access any part of a game that uses Xbox Live, the console can 'phone home' and install the patches anyway.

    If someone didn't have an XBOX Live account, why the HELL would they have an ethernet cable jacked into their box with a connection to the outside world?

  9. Re: Microsoft owns it? by mentin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    99.9% of the customers don't attempt to run Linux, would not notice any change and would not consider this a problem even if they knew it. And that 0.1% who would like to run Linux ... are they really customers?

    --
    MSDOS: 20+ years without remote hole in the default install
  10. MS is just testing the waters... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For doing the same with there Windows OS.

    Microsoft Knows no matter how many times they say patch or else. Millions of people wait for the or else to happen, and it makes them look bad.

    This is just the same has forced childhood immunization for better public heath. You don't have to immunize every machine, just enough so the probability of the next machine in the series being vulnerable is near zero.

  11. Re:what? by MrLint · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Very soon we are going to need an actual lawsuit to reassert out rights as the public to use devices we purchase in any manner we deem fit.

  12. Re:Even better suggestion by TiMac · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The entire point of producing a console system is to have complete dominance over what software can run on it anyway.

    Maybe NOW it is, since Microsoft introduced the concept of loss-leading on the hardware...made up by software licensing.

    Originally, it was to have specialized hardware to do one thing--and to do it well. I still believe very much in this philosophy. I rarely buy combination devices (such as radar detector/GPS/compass/etc, swiss army knives) because they do a lot, but not always well, and to upgrade one part, you need to re-buy the whole thing.

    I use my computer as a TOOL. I get my work done on it. I communicate with my friends and family with it. It is the closest I come to a "do-all" device. But games I leave to something else. It's a personal choice--so I won't claim that everyone should do the same.

    However, the idea that consoles exist solely as a means of "control" is ludicrous. I love my GameCube--because it is simple, and it works. And it has the best controller ever. YMMV....

    --

  13. Re:what? by AlexMax2742 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    What if you are going to race that car in NASCAR? There are a few requlations on your car that you HAVE to have. Either that or you don't race in a NASCAR race. Same thing with Xbox and XBox Live. There are a few requirements on your Xbox that you HAVE to have. Either that, or you don't play on Xbox Live.

    When you play on Live, it's more than just you. You have to ensure that people are playing on a level playing field. Sure, you pay for Xbox Live service too, but when you join a health club, that doesn't mean you can go in and destroy their equipment.

    So what if you don't play online? Just dont install Live. Make sure you never click through to Xbox Live on your console.

    --
    I'm the guy with the unpopular opinion
  14. Agreed! by GoatPigSheep · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A modded xbox could just as easily be modded in order to facilitate cheating on their network...

    MS has every right to protect their networks from cheating gamers.

    --
    GoatPigSheep, the 3 most important food groups
  15. You guys know it's not yours by narftrek · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've been reading the replies to this comment & I have to say that you guys know the stuff isn't yours. The hardware is yes but the software isn't. It hasn't been your software ever. You may own the CD it's on but the bits burned on to it are owned by the creator of the content. Every piece of NON GPL software has been this way since I can remember. The EULA states it isn't yours. That's why you can't just do whatever with it you want. You never have been free to hack it. The BIOS in the XBOX is yours too, but the software they put on it to boot-probably thiers. That's stretching it a bit but I'm sure some M$ lawyer could make it sound good.

    Now before the flames begin, I believe that what I buy should be mine to do whatever with. But due to whatever rules that govern software it just doesn't happen. For instance, if I mod my Nokia phone with some new software I can probably bet that Verizon isn't gonna let me access their network. Yeah the phone is mine, but they don't have to let it on thier network if it's been modded. Lemme change some settings in my RCA modem to get better DL speeds on Comcast cable internet. Yep, Comcast will shut it off. Go mod your car's CPU and bet that Ford will say nope you voided the warranty, not our problem. Not all car mods are legal.

    Software has never been anyone's it's been sold to. Why does anyone think M$ will change just because it's a video game system?

  16. Whining, bitching, moaning, etc... by Mulletproof · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "According to The Inquirer, Microsoft has used their Xbox Live Vole System to patch any Xboxes that access it....without asking their permission before installing the software. Further, according to The Xbox Linux Project, users who do not have an Xbox Live account may find themselves being patched without permission as well.... I don't know if I feel comfortable with ANYONE installing software on my hardware without asking permission first."

    Oh come the FUCK on.

    Did you just miss the entire function of a console? It's called plug n' play you whining freaks, designed specifically to make downloads, patching and other OS maintence/updates as transparent as possible while allowing the user to concentrate on gaming , or did you forget that MINOR point in the process of modding the XBox for a function if was never intended to fullfill? Like saaaaay... TURNING IT INTO A PC AND ADDING LINUX TO IT?????

    And golly gee whiz, those same Linux Activists are now finding that their console, designed to primarily be a hands off OS device, is downloading patches WITHOUT THEIR PERMISSION!?!?! THE HORROR! Will you people get some perspective, not to mention a freakin' CLUE!??! Of course it's downloading and patching shit without your permission since that was how it was designed in the first place-- A seemless gaming experience, which means not asking you all the annoying details on OS upkeep. IMAGINE THAT.

    And for cryin out loud, it's not what you're doing that pisses me off so much, it's the innocent, self-righteous "we've been wronged!" attitude that you take doing it. Give it a rest already. You're modding a device beyond it original purpose and beyond the intentions/plans of the designers. Suck it up already.

    --
    You need a FREE iPod Nano
    1. Re:Whining, bitching, moaning, etc... by sys$manager · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And if MS DIDN'T patch the XBOX automatically, you'd have the same people calling for the heads of everyone at MS for having an insecure product.

      No matter what, MS is bad to a lot of people.

  17. Re:what? by Xerithane · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Quite seriously, if I bought an X-Box, I think it'd be rather neat if it self-patched.

    I have an XBox, and I patched it on XBox Live without having a Live account. You connect, and it updates Dashboard and all is well. This is what I expect with a console that has a hard drive.

    Normal customers buy it to play games on, and it's a perfectly good platform for that.

    I don't want Linux on my XBox. I want my XBox to play games. People are getting their panties in a bundle because Microsoft is fixing bugs in their software and auto-patching. How else are they going to try to keep this stuff patched? Otherwise they end up with a hundred-and-one different XBox software versions out there. It's easier to bitch about rights instead of thinking that this is actually a good thing and just a few people are being inconvenienced by it.

    I certainly wouldn't buy it for something else, so really, I don't particularly care. I can see the angle some people are coming from, and I understand it... but this isn't really an issue where you can get the normal customer outraged, because it doesn't affect what they actually bought the product to do.

    It does exactly what I expected it to do. All the way, and I enjoy it. It does affect what I bought the product to do though, it makes it better.

    --
    Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
  18. "Fit for purpose" and the "reasonable person" by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Here in Australia (and the UK I think) a good has to be "fit for purpose" which basically means being fit for the purpose for which they are generally sold, and also being fit for any specific or particular purpose made known at the time of purchase agreement.

    I think that most reasonable people would accept that the purpose for which an XBox is generally sold is for the running of XBox games. Unless an update interferes with that and therefore renders the XBox unfit for purpose I doubt we'd get much help from consumer protection law.

    The concept of a "reasonable person" is also used. I doubt you could argue successfully that a "reasonable person" would expect something that is unadvertised by the manufacturer and publically discussed as a "bug" is a "feature" that has subsequently been removed.

    So I think in terms of consumer protection law you'd be out of luck in declaring that the product has been rendered defective or unfit for purpose by the update.

    There might be other legal avenues, but I think that one is closed.

    --
    Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
  19. Ahem... by RomSteady · · Score: 3, Insightful
    What most people seem to miss here is there is a very core difference to the way that Microsoft and Sony have been handling their consoles.

    Sony was trying to get a tax break, so they really pushed to have the PlayStation 2 classified as a computer rather than a video game console. To that end, they released Linux and the development kit add-on for it.

    Microsoft has been very adamant. According to the Xbox Terminology Guide, you are only allowed to call it the "Xbox Video Game System."

    The classification does tend to support a certain viewpoint, however. Microsoft isn't auto-updating your computer unless you consent. They're upgrading your video game console...although you do consent when you sign up for Live, if you actually read the Terms of Service.

    --
    RomSteady - I came, I saw, I tested. GamerTag: RomSteady / http://www.romsteady.net
  20. Do you people really ever listen to yourselves? by Razzious · · Score: 3, Insightful

    For months as the Xbox approached you preached that it was an evil that M$ wanted to take over the gaming industry.

    Then you decided they were geeky enough if you could install Linux (the Arch Competitor of Microsoft).

    You bought hardware and claim it as your own, with Microsoft saying if you are going to use their services, you aree going to have to maintain their security.

    Then you all act surprised like you can't believe Microsoft would actually fight to have their software remain intact.

    You play with fire and you get burned.

    --
    Razzious Domini
    I could be a GREAT KARMA WHORE if I could just shed the few morals I have left.
  21. Don't buy an X-Box - buy a PS/2 instead! by TiddlyPom · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Microsoft is hostile to supporting Linux on their own platform as it undermines the business model of the X-Box and obviously Linux is the closest competitor to their own flagship operating system (XP or Server .NET 2003).

    I find Microsoft breathtakingly arrogant and their products extremely inefficient and bloaty but you cannot be surprised when they want to patch their own product to reduce the likelyhood of hackers messing about with the X-Box Live network!

    No, the most worrying aspect about all of this is the support that it lends (to average users) to the 'Palladium' initiative and to trusted computing in general - i.e. to turn all computers into turnkey systems that cannot be modified by the end user.

    My suggestion? Support other vendors that actively encourage Open Source such as Sony and their PS/2

    Playstation 2 Linux Kit

    Playstation 2 Linux Home Page

    and withdraw any support for products (such as the X-Box) that encourage 'trusted computing' and Palladium.

    BTW I use both M$ XP at work/home and various flavours of Linux.

  22. Re: Microsoft owns it? by CerebusUS · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What this article never touches on (because it's Slashdot, and Slashdot hates Microsoft) is that the update adds serious functionality to the Live client. The changes are good. They updated the main dashboard as well, and that dashboard will ship with all new games.

    They fixed the bugs because they were... get this... bugs. What allowed Linux to run on an unmodded xbox was a buffer overflow exploit. Why would you knowingly leave those in a code revision?

    You want to run linux on a xbox? mod it. or just go buy a cheap Dell.