Slashdot Mirror
Apple Sends Hidden Message to Hackers?
RetrogradeMotion writes "The OSx86 Project is reporting on a hidden
message to hackers in Apple's new MacBook Pro. The new Intel-based OS X contains
a file named 'Dont Steal Mac OS X.kext' and is accompanied by the message,
'The purpose of this Apple software is to protect Apple copyrighted materials
from unauthorized copying and use.' The file is not present in either the
PowerPC version of OS X or the Intel version shipped to developers last year.
While Apple has sent messages
to hackers before, is this a tounge-in-cheek introduction to the anticipated (and hated) Trusted Platform Module? Is locking down OS X a strategic necessity or a missed opportunity?" Obviously a big maybe here, but a good story just the same.
I recall a company in the past that wouldn't sell you their software unless you purchased their hardrware. They were taken to court and forced to unbundle the OS from the Hardware since the OS was capable for running on other hardware. I can't recall the company name off hand but I feel someone will to do the same to Apple.
I thought they only read .knfo files.
It says ooooooooo.
Peter, those are Cheerios.
It was IBM, but they were also under Anti-Trust scrutiny that placed a lot of restrictions on their business. Another example: They were forced to license things like ISA and VGA to PC clone manufacturers for a very low price.
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
Anyone else amused that they quoted the text saying not to "distribute or reproduce" any portion of the text? Hehe... Too late!
'Dont Steal Mac OS X.kext' Ok... stealing Windows!
The best excuse for a President, a King or others *insert your words*, is God. God has still yet to find an excuse.
Think about it. One of the reasons Windows can be so annoying is that there are a bazillion different configurations. Apple can keep OS X running smoothly because they know exactly what's inside their machines. Once it gets put on a Dell, some idiot's going to complain about how buggy OS X is because it doesn't run on his own personal cobbled-together POS.
Now, with regard to the text in question
software is to protect Apple copyrighted materials from unauthorized copying and use.
this could merely indicate that Apple is going get more aggressive about insuring that the OS in use is indeed paid for. That is, if a single user copy is bought, then it is only used on the single computer. I have no problems with this, as a five user edition can be acquired for less than Windows XP. Now, if this copy protection becomes too much of hassle and wastes my time, such as typing in long serial numbers, I will likely be looking for an OS with less hassle.
But the facts remains that the move to intel will expose Apple to a greater risk of unlicensed use of thier product, and they are likely to react accordingly, no matter how silly. I hope they don't make me pay for an extra chip to manage thier shrinkage issue. I hope that it is a simple matter of registering the machine and the serial of the software at Apple, as they appear to do now, and then just leave us alone. Honestly, if I wish to install one of my licensing of Mac OS on an extra PC, and I cannot, then I am likley to an become an irate customer. And given how ambivilant many of us are about the move to intel, I would hope that Apple would think long and hard about transforming that ambivilance to outright annoyance.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
Except in that case there was some unfair monopoly issues involved.
In apples case, the market share is far to small to be even considered for that.. So they can bundle as much as they want.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
OK I've asked a couple lawyers and they all seem to agree. If Apple sells their OS separately on their website (which they do)*. They can't legal say that you can only use their software their hardware. The other side of course is you need to break the DMCA to use it on any other hardware. I'd really like to see someone challege Apple in court. I don't think they can legally say you can buy their OS, but can only use it on their hardware.
* Currently, they only sell the PPC version, but let's assume they'll offer the next release to Intel Mac users.
Keep up the good work! Thanks guys, without you jumping on every Winblows exploit, we would never have gotten where we are today. Linux and OS X for a brighter future! - The Apple Team
The 'Net is a waste of time, and that's exactly what's right about it. - William Gibson
I recall a company in the past that wouldn't sell you their software unless you purchased their hardrware. They were taken to court and forced to unbundle the OS from the Hardware since the OS was capable for running on other hardware. I can't recall the company name off hand but I feel someone will to do the same to Apple.
People who don't understand monopoly law should have their fingers hacked off so they don't post such stupid comments.
Look, I know some people like to bash Apple because they tie the OS to the hardware. Bash away on that argument I don't care, on several levels you are right. But your not so subtle implication is that somehow Apple's situation is the same as Microsoft's is a fundamental lack of brain matter for anyone who's posted on slashdot.
Apple is NOT a monopoly, Microsoft IS a monopoly. The first step to understanding monopolies is quite simply that the rules change once you are a monopoly. Monopolies wield incredible power and pervert the forces of a free market into something that is definitely not a free market. Everyone argument ever made that is anti-Microsoft is based on this premise. Bassed on that, Microsoft's actions are typically illegal, while Apple's actions at worst are quite simply immoral. It doesn't make them any less annoying, but under law they aren't illegal, because market forces have the opportunity to break that bundling package if someone with a better business model (that's not illegal) comes along.
Go back to the shallow end of the gene pool where you belong. John Dvorak has a seat next to him waiting for you.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
Cute message but of course it's not hidden in any way; it lacks the finesse and charm of the "Stolen © Apple" easter egg (described at the second link in the article summary, for those who didn't RTFA). Too bad nobody ever copied the ROM on the early Macs and get busted; it would have been a pretty hilarious moment in Apple legal history for someone to bring that message up on the screen during a trial. This would serve the same purpose if it wasn't so obvious; then again, perhaps there is a hidden version of the same message just waiting to be popped open at the right time....
it's an absolute necessity to lock down OS X from PC use. Apple has, after a series of costly mistakes (i.e. believing that a major corporation like IBM would actually spend money to actively develop a chip that has less that 4% market share) backed themselves into a corner when it comes to software and hardware development. Not to say they aren't good at either of those, but they now serve a very focused and very concentrated user base, consisting mainly of schools and, of course, artists of every kind. The cost is that to continue making the products they do, they must charge a relative premium.
And if their (excellent) software were suddenly available for the $350 dollar PC you bought from dell (don't tell me no one in their right mind would dare put the holy OS X on a dell... there are enough people not in their right mind to make that common practice) their computer market would be cut in half because frankly; every school, business and especially those poor ass artists, would love to run a safer and more creative friendly platform on a cheaper computer.
Now, maybe they could make more money if they just dropped computer development completely, but I think someone over at Apple believes that they can start to take some more serious market share back... and with the Intel Macs, it looks as though they can.
I don't think that's true. I believe ISA was simply reverse engineered, I don't think it was ever licensed by anybody. That was the whole point to the PS/2 and the Micro Channel architecture... it was something IBM actually owned and COULD license. They had this vision of a piece of every PC out there, but MCA was complex, expensive to implement, and then expensive to license on top of that. So, for the most part, the industry just went around them, with EISA (never broadly taken up), VESA Local Bus for graphics, and then eventually PCI. Micro Channel died a quiet death.
I don't think anyone has ever attempted to license VGA, either. NVidia and ATI license out their modern 3D chips to third parties, but basic VGA functionality is, to my best knowledge, a completely free specification, and always has been.
MSFT is in a different position. They have the OEMs by the balls but do not actually make any hardware themselves.
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
You may not copy, modify, reverse engineer, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, transfer or redistribute this file, in whole or in part.
"For this next song, we're going to play 'Dont Steal Mac OS X.kext'." WTF?
If you can read this sig, you're too close.
Apple could morph into a pure software house specializing in multimedia OSes
And instantly be crushed by Microsoft.
Every iPod has a sticker that says "Don't Steal Music". And we all know iPod users are the least likely to steal. This is obviously because Apple users in general always pay attention to little lables like this. And by touching anything Apple, even their code, by proxy makes you an Apple user, it's like a disease, it's catchy.
I believe anyone hoping to see OS X running on non-Apple hardware is gonna be SOL now.
Here's the output of system_profiler, ioreg, and kextstat on an Intel-based iMac:
http://appleintelfaq.com/#17.6
Of note in ioreg:
| +-o TPM
And kextstat:
83 0 0x20a15000 0x3000 0x2000 com.apple.Dont_Steal_Mac_OS_X (4.0.0)
Do you even know what a fucknut is?
Sexual intercourse is kicking death in the ass while singing. ~Charles Bukowski
'Dont Steal Mac OS X.kthnx'
At some point later, Christian Bauer released Shapeshifter to compete with EMPLANT, and then after Jim Drew claimed that Shapeshifter was stealing EMPLANT ip (which kind of put the lie to his earlier claims that the card held the emulation engine) released the GPLed Basilisk II, which is still usable on modern hardware - emulating the MCM680x0 Mac under Windows, x86 Linux and Unixes, and PPC Mac OS X.
In any case, if I recall correctly the ROM wasn't even used directly... you could obtain a ROM image on the net if you didn't have one to rip with the card.
"It is our blasphemy which has made us great, and will sustain us, and which the gods secretly admire in us." - Zelazny
Can't Apple be forced to release OS X for all x86?
It would be nice to be able to run OSX on the desktop without buying new hardware, I've been quite happy with it on the laptop. But I fear that supporting the near-infinite number of configurations would introduce stability problems and slow Apple's rate of development... which is a big reason that its attractive in the first place.
Honestly, the only reason I'd want to run OSX on generic x86 is simply because I don't like ANY of Apple's desktop setups. The Mac Mini is underpowered with a G4 and 64 meg video card, I don't like the concept of married Computers/Displays a la iMac, and the PowerMac is kind of overkill for my purposes. I mean, am I really the only one that wants (one) reasonable CPU & a nice (upgradable) video card of occasional gaming in a seperate tower so that I can upgrade thie display seperatley and use the machine as a server when its outlived its usefullness as a desktop?
A huge portion of what makes the Mac OS X so valuable is the user experience that goes with it. A decent portion of the user experience lies in the hardware integration, and in the quality of the hardware on which it runs. If I had OS X running on my previous laptop (Toshiba Satellite 3000-something, I think), for instance... It was a great laptop, but the hardware is just not the same caliber as that which Apple sells. More importantly, OS X is not DESIGNED for the Toshiba Satellite line, nor is the Satellite designed for OS X. Apple has no control over the environment in which the system is running and therefore opens their system up to decreased responsiveness or even stability, as the case may be.
Excellent software on shoddy hardware still makes for a poor user experience.
Apple management will fail in its attempts to thwart the hackers.
The hackers and a handful of tech savy users that want OS X on generic hardware are irrelevant. All Apple needs to do is prevent someone with the skills of an average user from being able to get Mac OS X working reliably on generic hardware. The generic PCs running Mac OS X will be novelties, more conversation pieces than serious work environments. There will not be a robust set of drivers, merely what ships on geniune Apple hardware. Apple can break the hack used to get it to work every system software update. It will be a somewhat unreliable machine, unavailable for days at a time while hackers reverse engineer and workaround the latest software update. Will they do so, sure, but it will be irrelevant to mainstream users.
The grandfather post said nothing about monopolies, just binding software to specific hardware. Two different things. It seems to me that the point was that if you buy a piece of software, you buy a right to run it on whatever you want. Hence, emulators are not illegal, but roms are.
Perhaps you should read a post before posting a hysterical comeback with eugenic overtones. I'll go play in the shallow end, you and ESR can do what you please in the patio section.
I have freaks! I did something right...
This is the infamous Broadcom chipset, used in the Airport Express module and Mac desktops for several years now. Broadcom publishes virtually nothing about their WLAN chipsets, and does not respond to requests for information about them.
This isn't realyl Apple's fault for the lack of disclosure, but is their fault for sticking with such a tight-lipped vendor.
Also, you have to remember that this is the *point* of the BSD license.
No... Apple would be more than happy not to be "scarce". They'd be pleased as punch if eveyone went out and bought a Mac. And thats the key. They dont want you running OSX on your eMachines Wal-Mart special. I recall hearing something about them not even making a boxed version of OSX intel (thus tying the OS to the machine you bought it with). For the umpteenth time... Apple is a hardware company. Apple makes the bulk of their money selling computers and iPods. Steve Jobs has been down the road of killing a hardware platform before in order to sell its software (which is just what many here are calling for, those too young to remember). I would not expect it to happen again. Would you pay $400 for a student license for OSX? Well, very few did. When Apple kills its hardware business to focus on sales of OSX, you'd be wise to consider selling your Apple stock.
Here's the rest of the story. The hardware that goes into personal computers built by Dell, Lenovo, etc. is dirt cheap, and the profit margins are ultra-thin. Meanwhile the x86 Macs command a price premium because Apple builds them. If everyone could run the new Mac OS on an regular PC, who would want to buy the x86 Macs?
But the real story is the one that nobody seems to notice, for the last 15 years Microsoft has made all the profits that the computer resellers should have been making. Their large bulk is entirely made up of the razor-thin margins everybody else accepts for them. Bill Gates brags about brining the PC "ecosystem" to the world, cheap commodity computers that you can throw together and whip out of almost anything. What he doesn't mention is that he planned the whole thing back when Microsoft first sold DOS to IBM... we'll profit from everybody else's hard work. Everytime you see a hardware manufacturer go out of business, it's just a few hundred million MS got instead of them. The world was suckered in by them, if we had kept the old model of different companies making different operating systems the world could have been much nicer these days and the internet would definitely be more standardized. Imagine if MS hadn't killed BE... instead of Intel and MS ruling the desktop market for so long and forcing single threaded high-Megahurtz toaster oven computers on the world, we could have had BeOS 7 systems with Quad PPC chips with 4 cores on each by now. Imagine if Amiga could have stayed profitable... this whole stupid soap-opera episode of D'oh! Finally making the Pentium M could have been avoided. There's be a lot more nice OS' out there and some great hardware choices but... commodity won, and so did Bill. I really hope Apple can get people to think about quality once again.
Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
This message is in a kernel extension (kext). I don't think this is a "hidden" message so much as it might be a kernel message that displays when OS X doesn't detect its own Apple hardware. When people start hacking OS X to run on generic PCs, I wonder if this message is what will display somewhere on bootup.
"Sufferin' succotash."
But they don't even bother to give something back by opening their hardware specs so the people that wrote/write BSD can use their OS on Apple hardware?
Well, if you really want to call it "theirs". The wireless chipset that the "Airport Extreme" cards are built around are produced by Broadcom - and Broadcom has had a multitude of excuses why they can't release open drivers. If you open up your Apple hardware, you'll notice a lot of chips made by other companies, and they're bound to the conditions of the license they acquired use of the technology under. It'd be nice if they could release specs, I agree - but this is one situation where my and your desire on it is irrelevant to them.
Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
Max: "I'd be peeing my pants if I wore any!"
But what about Apple's monopoly on COOL? What about THAT huh!
I say those damn monopolists should be forced to redesign the entire product lines of other manufacturers!
Then we'd ALL be better off.
"seineeW erA setariP X SOcaM"
"Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
Hmm, I guess you've never tried to install Linux on an ASUS notebook. Today, three years later it might be an easier experience but believe me it used to be a royal pain. Wicked broken bioses that wouldn't sleep the machine when the lid closed, nasty bugs that would lock up the gfx hw so badly to require a cold restart, crappy P'n'P that wouldn't enumerate the attached hardware and make linux struggle when looking for it and stinky bioses that wouldn't properly shut down the PIC (or perhaps jitter some "lid open" signal, but that's not sw, it's plain bad hw) and wake windows 2000 when the laptop was sleeping... and presumably inside a bag.
I had to choose between a vertical solution where the same company designed both hardware and software and quickly nailed every single darn bug (not only security gaping maws) or a chaos of different hardwares only loosely following specs and hoping to fix 'em in software workarounds.
I bought an external firewire enclosure; it used to work fine but the damn chipset firmware decided to quit claiming it's fw id as by spec. Os X would refuse to sense the device unless, once in a while the signals would be stable enough to get the firmware to follow procedures. I had to wait for an xp64 fix that incidentally added the necessary firmware workarounds (IE increasing wait states during power up) to get the thing reliable on the mac. Hmm, and that was an add-on... imagine that multiplied for all peripherials in a regular pc. Apple takes the chore out of computing.
Apple is turn key. I bought a bluetooth thingie and the guy at the shop said: "hmm, I don't know, this device is a bit fussy I struggled a weekend and failed on a couple of XPs". I plugged it in, waited for Os X to bring the bluetooth portion alive and synced my address book within 5 minutes. The guy at the counter was close to tears; I was happy to have bought an Apple Powerbook with Os X.
Ok, I could choose a dell, run windows home and follow the program, but I'd be struggling with viruses, spywarez and surrendering 1 GHz and a RAM stick to Norton to get my job done. Or I could run Linux and curse the damn manufacturer for making cheap broken hardware and only provide software fixes for windows.
I still long for open, fully spec'd platforms, properly designed hardware modules and combinations and timely updates to fix deviations from the agreed standard. Today, by a bad approximation, that means using windows. Today, I won't run windows and I will happily pay 100for the privilege of better software bundled to neatly ironed hardware (where linux, btw, is a champ)
Mi domando chi à il mandante di tutte le cazzate che faccio - Altan
At least for the next ten years, as MS is always that far behind copying Apple.
The TPM is used only to make sure it's OK to run OSX on that box...
Apple has publically stated they do not care if you run anything else (like Windows or Linux) on an Apple Intel box.
TPM you see, is a tool. And like any tool it can be used for good or for ill. Now while it's an open question of weather you having to work around it to run OS X on a non-Apple Intel box is for good or ill, it's certainly less annoying than if Apple had used TPM to lock the box down so that ONLY OS X could run on it.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
If you open up the original iPod firmware in a hex editor with the proper number of columns, the first thing you see is an ASCII-Art stop sign and a scary legal message. This is nothing new.
I used to read Caltizzle. I was a lot cooler than you.