Mac OS X Cracked For PCs Again

An anonymous reader writes "Ars Technica and The Register are reporting the Apple Kernel 10.4.8 has been cracked using Apple's publicly available source trees. This is the first time Apple was hit by hackers again since Maxxuss silently left the scene.The funny thing about this is the hacker who cracked OSx has released his sources according to APSL. He told Ars Technica in an interview that he did this because he believes in freedom of information, but will this now harm Apple's opensourceness?" From the article: "Unfortunately, free and legal are not necessarily the same thing, and the EULA for OS X requires Mac hardware. However, there is an interesting comment on the blog, one that asserts the requirement of Mac hardware is a "post-sale" restriction. Such a restriction may not be applicable in certain countries, such as those of the European Union. Expect to see what Apple Legal thinks about that shortly."

Comments

No GUI

[johndierks]

What the summary doesn't say is that this method does not enable the GUI. Booting into single user mode works, but unfortunately I'll have to cancel that Dell I ordered.

Re:No GUI

[wo1verin3]

It doesn't say it because it isn't true.

From TFA:

I had to remove a key which you need to reinsert if you want to run its GUI, due to legal issues. I called it the "magicpoem" maybe you got the point now. The hex for it is around so don't mail me about it, I want [won't] spread anything illegal.

Darwin ONLY

[diamondsw]

All this does is give you Darwin. Its hardly a "hack" - just compiling Darwin/x86, which you've been able to do with Apple's blessing for years (save a brief interlude when kernel sources weren't ready yet).

Now if they get around the binary signing on critical GUI components (Finder, WindowServer, etc) then I'll be more impressed.

Post Sale Restrictions

[popo]

"Post sale restrictions" are IMHO the legal flaw in just about *every* EULA.

You've gone to the store, you've purchased a product, you've driven home, you've opened the product and are in the process of installing the
product and WHAMMO -- you're forced to agree to something after you've already expended time, energy and money towards posession of that
product. If you disagree with the EULA, you'll need to expend further time, energy and money (and bereaucratic frustration) in order to
undo the financial transaction and receive compensation. (Ever try taking XP back to Staples and saying you didn't agree with the EULA?).

This is a form of trickery and extortion that goes far beyond bait-and-switch. It is a transaction in which 'good faith' on the part of the
manufacturer is non-existent. EULA's are legal documents which cannot be given due diligence (because the expense of said diligence would vastly
exceed the price of the product), and they are agreed to by minors, the elderly and consumers with no legal background every day. The price
for disagreement is more wasted effort, more lost time and more lost money.

Post Sale Agreements should be illegal.

Re:Post Sale Restrictions

[Budenny]

The problem, at least in the EU, is not the Eula, or whether you have understood it, been given notice of it etc. The problem is trying to restrict the use you make of a product once you have bought it. The EU generally has regarded this as anti competitive practice.

So, take the example of Wolf garden tools. They make handles and a bunch of stuff that snaps onto them. There is nothing to stop them making them of a different fit. There is nothing to stop them voiding the warranty on their tools and their handles if used with other suppliers tools or handles. You cannot, in the EU, sell people things on condition they use them only in certain ways, and have that be legally enforceable.

If people know different, give a few examples, real cases where they have been upheld.

No matter what it says in any Eula they sell them with, and no matter what you sign in the store pre sale or as a condition of sale, no court in the EU is ever going to uphold any action against you for using the stuff with a different handle or tool.

Similarly, Apple may make OSX unusable with non-Macs. They may refuse to support it. But if it is installable on non-Apple stuff, and as long as you have violated no other laws in getting it (copyright or anti-hacking laws) then you are going to be legally in the clear.

A company cannot tell you what to do with something you have bought, once you've bought it. Software, hardware, whatever. This is a post sale restriction on use, and there is some possibility that pretending in a Eula to have the ability to impose such conditions when you must know quite well that you do not, is contrary to Fair Trading laws.

This is not legal advice. I am not a lawyer.

Not news.

[argent]

Um, they *did* make the operating system (Darwin) OSS. How did you think the source you're looking at was released in the first place? This hasn't been news for five years at least.

They haven't made the GUI shell (Quartz, Aqua, etc...) that runs on top of it OSS, but then neither have all the companies that make accelerated X servers and other system software for Linux made their software OSS.

Re:Interesting.

[dr.badass]

That said, how do they get around by not making osx oss? Just curious.

The answer is right in front of you. There is no "getting around" anything. The GPL requires you to make the source of your modified versions available. It doesn't require you to make your completely unrelated code (i.e. the rest of Mac OS X) GPL.

Re:Apple gets to get with the program

[Bing Tsher E]

Sun still sells systems. With their own processor, even.

(Apple always just packaged somebody else's processor)

Re:Apple gets to get with the program

[speculatrix]

and IBM too, just not for the common man.

Re:Post Sale?

[Trillan]

If you installed it on a Mac, you installed it on a computer you had a license to use it on.

I'm not talking about how the discs are built, I'm talking about how the license works. Your Mac purchase includes a license for Mac OS. Any particular retail box updates one license to the version in the box. There's basically no way to buy a "full" license for Mac OS except for buying a Mac.

Mac Pro != MacBook Pro

[CatOne]

You're using the wrong products. The Mac Pro is the desktop system with the dual Woodcrest processors.

The MacBook Pro (laptop) isn't cheaper than a Dell notebook. Though the new ones are closer -- and they come with sufficient RAM (2 GB), hallelujah!

Re:Apple 0x86 Mac = Expensive, Boring 0x86 PC

[Anonymous Coward]

Mac Pro != MacBook Pro, Tweedle Dum. They have different names because they're different products.

Pay attention next time.