Apple Patents Remotely Disabling Jailbroken Phones

An anonymous reader writes "Apple yesterday applied for a patent to allow remotely disabling electronic devices when 'unauthorized usage' is detected. The patent application covers using the camera to take pictures of the unauthorized user and using GPS to determine location, and it involves ascertaining whether the phone has been hacked or jailbroken, using those as criteria for detecting 'suspicious behavior.' The patent would allow the carrier or any other 'authorized' party to disable or restrict the functionality of the device. Is this Apple's latest tool to thwart jailbreaking?"

Comments

It's probably

[geekoid]

a security measure for stolen iPhones.

Stolen phones

[Anonymous Coward]

Ummm, isn't this probably intended for stolen phones?

Re:FUD

[ViViDboarder]

Key points from TFA backing me up...

• Claim 4 mentions jailbreaking but looks like they refer to it as a method of potential vulernability
• Claim 10 refers to transfering sensitive user information to a remote site and then clearing the device of said information
• Most glaring is claim 13 which refers to comparing heartbeats of the current using a heartbeat sensor and comparing it with a library of AUTHORIZED USERS

This whole post is straight FUD.

Re:Just because it's patented...

[beelsebob]

The headline is massively misleading, they've patented remotely disabling devices that the device has detected has been stolen, not jailbroken phones.

Stupid slashdot is stupid^H^H^H^H^H filled with anti-apple trolls.

Re:Just because it's patented...

[Low Ranked Craig]

Mod parent up. I read the patent (shock!) and he is right. http://www.patentvest.com/console/reports/docs/app/20100207721.html This whole post is a flamebait post.

Re:Just because it's patented...

[oldspewey]

I'm rooting for apple on this one. If apple is able to successfully patent remote bricking of products that people own and have paid for, then the consumer electronics universe becomes significantly simpler and easier to navigate.

Re:Just because it's patented...

[Low Ranked Craig]

Jesus there are a lot of people out there that think they are freaking experts on this stuff.

let's start with your first sentence

No, it means that it's illegal for anybody else to do it without paying apple royalties.

1. It's not illegal, it would be a civil issue. 2. If Apple is granted the patent they may license it or may not, and they may or may not charge royalties. Since you are an expert in this area you surly realize that the majority of these filings are defensive, right? That the primary purpose of most of these is so that when a patent troll comes after the deep pocket company like Apple that Apple can say we have patents in this area as well?

Since this isn't a feature that sane or rational consumers would actually want on their phones

Really? Since I'm certain that you read the application as I did, then you will see that this is a feature that a lot of people would like to have, including myself. I want them to be able to figure out who douche bag is who stole my phone, where they are and brick the device

Maybe it's because I haven't had my morning coffee yet, but there is something irritating about sitting down to read /. in the morning and first thing reading a bunch of posts by people that clearly haven't bothered to read the article (I know, this is /. and I shouldn't really expect anyone to read anything) and spouting off bullshit as if it were the gospel.

Now, RTFA and get off of my lawn.