Slashdot Mirror
Apple's War Against Jailbreaking Now Makes Perfect Sense
An anonymous reader writes "Apple has always been extremely anti jailbreaking, but it might now have a good reason to plug up the exploits. As Hardware 2.0 argues, Apple's new iOS 7 Activation Lock anti-theft mechanism which renders stolen handsets useless (even after wiping) unless the owner's Apple ID is entered relies on having a secure, locked-down OS. Are the days of jailbreaking iOS coming to a close?" I can see a whole new variety of phone-based ransom-ware based on this capability, too.
timothy, you're going to have to explain how the implimentation of this feature by Apple in any way changes a developer's ability to create ransomware with similar functionality. 'Cause the way I see it, to be able to hijack the Authentication Lock, you're probably going to have to have sufficiently low-level access to just impliment your own lock.
No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
The problem is, as with most anti-theft technology like this, it won't hurt the thieves as much as it will screw-over buyers of used hardware.
This will not cut down on theft as much as it will simply cripple the trust of the secondary market. After all, you can still steal an iPhone, stick it on Craigslist for cash, sell it to some poor sucker and get leave before he charges up the phone and figures out it was stolen and won't work.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
How about "war against security exploits that allow malicious users to gain unrestricted access to your phone?"
I guess Linux and Microsoft are both engaged in a 'war against jailbreaking' too, when they close fucking security exploits.
Jesus christ - if you want root on your device, get a device that is built to allow that. Don't bitch that a company closes fucking security holes in its software.
Whats wrong with IMEI blacklisting.
The summary implies they've had this in the works for multiple iterations of iOS and never did it. I find it highly doubtful they were ready to implement this, but didn't for what, 5 consecutive versions of iOS?
But we do want, insist actually, on root access for devices we own. If you can't log in as root, you don't own the device. Just give me the option to turn on root access using my Apple ID. Closing holes that allow for unauthorized privilege elevation is a good thing. Disallowing authorized use of the full functionality of a device is a bad thing.
Jesus christ - if you want root on your device, get a device that is built to allow that. Don't bitch that a company closes fucking security holes in its software.
I agree it is time to boycott apple for their anti-consumer practices than excusing their behaviour.
Google signed up to Prism long before apple
troll harder
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/06/new-leak-feds-can-access-anything-in-your-google-facebook-and-more/
This is *not* about permanently disabling or blacklisting a phone. This is about making the phone unusable for the thief, but keeping it technically sound so the rightful owner could still use it if it has been recovered. It'd be trivial to blacklist an IMEI, just as it would be to circumvent the blacklist by reprogramming the baseband controller. It'd be trivial to implement a "self destruct" on the phone that could be triggered remotely, but then you'd have a phone that would need at least one chip replaced before it'd work again. This is about non-destructive locking and it relies on the OS not being rooted. They may find a way to do that on newer hardware, but as I understand it, all current hardware has been "owned" sufficiently for a software-only compromise to be sufficient.
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
Thank you. I see now that Apple is in the clear because of the "but he did it first" rule. That rule didn't work way back when I played in the sandbox but apparently it does work on the internet.