Slashdot Mirror
iPhone Root Password Hacked in Three Days
unPlugged-2.0 writes "An Australian developer blog writes that the iPhone root password has already been cracked. The story outlines the procedure but doesn't give the actual password. According to the story: 'The information came from an an official Apple iPhone restore image. The archive contains two .dmg disk images: a password encrypted system image and an unencrypted user image. By delving into the unencrypted image inquisitive hackers were able to discover that all iPhones ship with predefined passwords to the accounts 'mobile' and 'root', the last of which being the name of the privileged administration account on UNIX based systems.' Though interesting, it doesn't seem as though the password is good for anything. The article theorizes it may be left over from development work, or could have been included to create a 'false trail' for hackers."
This will get picked up by blogs, news sites - and, if we're lucky, given a good mangling by sloppy journalists in the mainstream press - as somehow meaning that any iPhone can be "broken into" by a malicious third party, and/or that all iPhones are now "insecure", and/or that iPhones - and all the personal data on them - are now, because of this, vulnerable to remote attack, when none of those things are true.
Also, from TFA and the summary:
"Having the passwords will not do anybody any good for the moment. The iPhone has no console or terminal access, so there is no way to log in as either account. In fact, nobody even seems certain that the accounts access the machine at all, some Internet commentators suggesting that the password file was left over from early development work, or was intentionally included to throw hackers off the scent."
These kind of idiotic replies to the blog post are telling:
Poetic Justice - 04/07/07
So much for Apple being the most secure OS in the world. Welcome to Microsoft's world, Jobs.
Wow, cracking a local password on a file that belongs to a device to which you have physical access?
Stop the presses!
Since iPhones don't have any kind of access that makes this "discovery" meaningful, I'm sure that people will just misunderstand the implications of this, and because of the iPhones popularity - and a lot of peoples' desire to tear it down or create any FUD they can to dissuade interested people from possibly buying an iPhone - I'm sure this and related stories will be big news.
If Apple consider it important (ie: if there actually *is* a use for this, rather than just a false trail, or if they want to make people think that), all they need to do is update the values and/or system libraries in the next software update. They could even change the encryption *mechanism* to make it pretty-much un-brute-forceable if they wanted to. I doubt they need to do that though, just change it to a 31-character string with punctuation/digits etc.
Whereas this *is* news (hell, I'd submit it!), I think a lot of people criticising the iPhone at the moment still haven't made the leap from "this is a phone. It does X,Y,Z" to "this is a fully-fledged computer, masquerading as a phone" - with all that that implies.
Apple have said they intend to provide updates, changes, additions, etc. to the iPhone over time. They have a policy of supporting older computers with new OS releases, and I don't see why they wouldn't migrate this approach to their new market. It only *benefits* them if there are more used phones in circulation running OSX - even if it was a hand-me-down from the big-brother/sister who went and bought the new one...
If this truly is the "third leg" of Apple's business, someone will get yelled at internally, and the next update will fix it. End of story.
Simon.
Physicists get Hadrons!
If it's really YOURS, then why do you have to activate it via AT&T before it can be used, eh?
Except they don't do it for iPods. Each new "generation" of the iPod has run a different firmware *and* had different capabilities, like being able to search. The older iPods never got the functionality of the newer ones, ever. Clickwheel iPods can't "search", nor do they get the newer iPod games, etc. This is just like digital camera manufacturers, home network gear makers, etc. Very, very, very rarely do they take advantage of the firmware updates to increase functionality in any way. Why should they, when they can make you but version N+1?
Most iPods have radically different hardware than the previous generation too. In addition, there's some accounting rules that come into play with adding functions to something you already shipped and booked the revenue for. Once I've sold you a widget, if I spend any more engineering time to add something to it, I have to find revenue that pays for that somewhere. It's not a problem with OS X, because the $129 Leopard upgrade pays for the engineering in Leopard, not the revenue they already booked and reported when I bought the Mac in the first place.Apple stated on their last quarter conference call they're changing the way they book AppleTV and iPhone revenues to spread it out over 8 quarters, so they don't have that problem. Even though they get $600 today for an iPhone sold, they don't actually put the whole thing in the books right away as recognized revenue, they apply it over the next two years to ongoing engineering for existing units. Exactly what they'll do with that ability remains to be seen, but they've at least publicly stated their intent to improve the platform for early adopters.
This
When you have spent $350 on an iPod, $2500 on a MacBook Pro and $3500 on a Mac Pro--$500 to $600 on an iPhone is peanuts. Yummmm.....that Kool aid sure tastes good!!!
Badges!?! We don't need no stinking badges!