Slashdot Mirror
Apple Quietly Drops iOS Jailbreak Detection API
bednarz writes "Without explanation, Apple has disabled a jailbreak detection API in iOS, less than six months after introducing it. Device management vendors say the reasons for the decision are a mystery, but insist they can use alternatives to discover if an iPhone, iPod touch, or iPad has been modified so it can load and alter applications outside of Apple's iTunes-based App Store."
If you can jailbreak the phone, you can trick the detection API. Once the system is "untrustable" it is not trustable.
Jailbreaking became legally protected recently. Disabling functionality when a jailbreak is detected seems like it might open Apple to a class action lawsuit.
I'm sure they're legally allowed to say that jailbreaking voids the warranty, but I'm not sure they're willing to risk crippling a jailbreaker's device with an api flag.
"Sorry, you can't play our game because you jailbroke your phone" -- if Apple encouraged app developers to do this, things could get nasty.
IANAL - this post is total speculation
Nonsense, for fans of lock down "common sense" means that you do like the vast majority of people and leave control of the device to whoever locked it down. You're just a consumer, you shouldn't be doing that. You're supposed to visit the AppStore and consume.
It's a broken, twisted, and borderline abusive view on the world but that's what we have.
Damn skippy you don't jailbreak the phone that your workplace gave you. After all, they own that phone. Literally.
Which is what the article is actually about - functionality that allows enterprise software to detect whether a phone deployed through that enterprise has been jailbroken. It's a simple part of compliance testing of work issued equipment.
Indeed. Personally, I like how Google handles it on the Nexus One. Attempting to unlock it pops up a screen explaining that if you continue unlocking it that they are no longer responsible for what the software does. Which is fair enough, if they no longer have any control over the software, then it's a reasonable trade off.
But with the Android phones there's little reason to unlock it, unless one wants to run a custom UI, as you can already convenient install apps from elsewhere.
I might be missing something, but the iPod touch isn't a phone. And I'm not really sure why Google would even want to compete with it. Right now they're making phones and are moving into the tablet market. And they're making moves on netbooks as well.
And don't forget about Google TV. Seems like trying to compete with the iPod touch would be a distraction, and they haven't demonstrated any interest in it up to this point.
Assuming that is the only basis upon which it was used. However the vast, vast majority of iPhones I've seen used with work systems are personal devices and as the first poster noted once a phone is Jailbroken it can lie to you about everything.
So they may be jailbreaking what is most likely their personal device, and they could easily load a hack that made it go "yeah I'm not jailbroken."
I believe you could already legally unlock your phone.
You probably don't understand the intent of the DMCA. The purpose of it was to stop copyright infringement. It was never intended as a lock to protect a company's business practices. In fact, the write up from the Library of Congress specifically targetted that fact--that Apple had submitted their oral and written opposition asserting their attempts to protect their business model. The Library of Congress concluded that to mean that Apple wasn't really trying to protect the right's holder's copyright, instead they were trying to protect their business model.
This is what the Register (Library of Congress) stated (taken from the Ars Technica write-up):
"Apple is not concerned that the practice of jailbreaking will displace sales of its firmware or of iPhones," wrote the Register, explaining her thinking by running through the "four factors" of the fair use test. "Indeed, since one cannot engage in that practice unless one has acquired an iPhone, it would be difficult to make that argument. Rather, the harm that Apple fears is harm to its reputation. Apple is concerned that jailbreaking will breach the integrity of the iPhone's ecosystem. The Register concludes that such alleged adverse effects are not in the nature of the harm that the fourth fair use factor is intended to address."
Copyright protection is granted to protect the rights holder from illegal distribution of their content and not to prohibit owners of the hardware from doing other things with it once they own it.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
Sigh. You really ought to RTFA, otherwise you just come across as a dumbshit. This story has nothing to do with preventing you from doing what you want with your i-Device. It has everything to do with an enterprise-provided and -owned device reporting itself to the enterprise-owner that you as the non-owner-user have jailbroken your i-Device, thus causing a security hole the size of the one in your backside in the enterprise's system. And yes, Virginia, the enterprise that owns said device does have the right to know if you're being said dumbshit and jailbreaking a device that you don't even own.
Or, you receive a whole 70% of the profits by letting Apple promote (mostly passively unless you have a great app), host, transfer, and manage your apps. It's all in how you want to spin it. 30% to reach a market of millions and millions isn't bad.
are ya sure it hasn't just been retooled to become
super_secret_function()
I realize you are new here, but it is a long and proud slashdot tradion to not read the linked article. Many really hardcore slashdot users do not even read the summary.
I might be missing something, but the iPod touch isn't a phone. And I'm not really sure why Google would even want to compete with it.
ie, it's basically a tiny tablet. It's mobile computing just like the iPhone (but without a phone or mobile data). Seems like Google does want to compete or be involved in that market (see Galaxy Tab, Android Honeycomb, supposed hundreds of tablet models next year, etc).
The iPod Touch is a great device and probably accounts for a bit of the iPhone success in that folks who can't afford (or are too young) to own their own cell phone can still participate in the AppStore goodness.
Perhaps Google isn't competing because it would pretty much be a full-out declaration of war against Apple, and that would be bad for business.
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
You aren't looking at it from the skewed perspective of a carrier or vendor like Apple.
They may, but the vendors are banking on their ignorance.
Sure, but you aren't the kind of customer that companies selling locked down devices want.
Where did you get 9 months? It's 1 year, and has been as long as I can remember. See link.
Apple's Limited Warranty for iPhone covers your iPhone for one year from the date of original purchase. Apple's Limited Warranty begins on the date that the iPhone was originally purchased. To determine your warranty coverage, enter the serial number of your iPhone in the Online Service Assistant section on the Apple Support site. Apple may need to examine your proof of purchase document to verify your iPhone's warranty status.
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
Slashdot has summaries?
Trolling is a art,
What part of Magnuson-Moss puts the burden on the manufacturer to prove that a user modification was the cause of failure?
There are an infinite number of modifications that users might make. There is only one (or a very few) configurations tested, released and warranted by a manufacturer. How could any manufacturer possibly test an infinite number of combinations and permutations of unknown future hacks? There isn't enough time. There aren't enough engineers.
I suspect there is a little self serving interpretation of the law here, because unless parts are expected to be replaced due to wear and tear (tire on cars), its pretty standard in every industry in every country for the warranty to come off as soon you hack something.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
And you can.
PwnageTool has a very easy unlock option for the 1st gen iPhone, just check the box as you're configuring the jailbroken firmware. I think the version you want is 3.1.5, easily available on Pirate Bay (which is the official release location).
For later iPhones, it's simple enough to run UltraSn0w and unlock once you've jailbroken.
(I'm assuming from the tone of your post that you may well already know all of this, but GP appears to have no understanding of the ease of the process.)
As another poster has mentioned, you can turn the iPhone off -- the standard state most customers think of as "off" only really turns off the display.
However, a much easier way of doing the same thing is to just put the iPhone in Airplane mode. That mode disables all of the wireless subsystems at the hardware level, preventing it from being able to "phone home" in any way, shape, or form (I think airlines and various international air transport authorities would have a problem if the iPhone randomly overrode this mode when it felt like it).
Yaz.
Have a copy of the virgin OS files on disk, and modify the checksum function to check those files instead of the real OS's files. In effect, put the checksum function in its own jail, which I think qualifies as irony.
I think AOL did this once in the AIM protocl to prevent third party clients like Pidgin (or Gaim as it used to be known) from connecting to their network. I forget how Gaim's developer solved it...
What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
Thanks, Hobson.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
The biggest reason is the distance to cell towers when you are 30,000 feet above ground.
The cell phones would be sending at max power to talk with those distant towers. At the speed of an airplane, multiple towers would get the phone's weak requests to connect, and would each set aside a "slot" while waiting for the phone to complete handshake, which might never complete.
You can turn the ignition key and pump the accelerator in specific sequences to reveal the diagnostic codes on most modern vehicles (similar to video game controller button combos to unlock hidden easter eggs). The sequence is specific to your vehicle. The codes will be displayed on the dash through a series of blinking lights if there is not a display. All of this is available on Google.
> The base station is a long way down, and even at maximum transmit power
> the connection is too unreliable for voice.
No, do the math. 30,000 feet of empty air vs a mile of urban environment. The problem is a cell in a plane throws a very clear signal to every tower for miles around; All of which try to reply, hilarity ensues. And in the days of analog cell service there were only a couple hundred channels usable from any one cell site (to allow overlap) so a planeload of idiots trying to make calls would present a moving cellphone jammer to the system. And with digital the problem is only a little less horrible. The root of the problem is the cell network was conceived as a 2D environment and the problem of the Z axis's existence was left undefined.
Democrat delenda est
So Apple is the only smartphone provider with an app store? News to me.