The iOS 7 Jailbreak Fiasco

Bismillah writes "Evad3rs' new iOS 7 jailbreak featured a Chinese app store that sold pirated software, and which was pulled from Evasi0n7 soon after launch. Latest rumors say that the exploit used for Evasi0n7 was stolen by a certain person, offered up for sale, so the Evad3rs did a deal with TaiG instead. Jay 'Saurik' Freeman of Cydia meanwhile isn't happy about the whole thing, saying he was given no time to test Evasi0n7."

Comments

Jailbreakingg

[TyFoN]

It's funny. In any other operating evironment you would call these root exploits.
However in the Apple camp it's simply jailbreaking. One does not dear imply that the iphone is insecure :)

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Kell Bengal]

It's more a case of regaining entry after being locked out of your own house, rather than someone else breaking in.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

It's more a case of regaining entry after being locked out of your own house, rather than someone else breaking in.

Except that the burglar could use the same route.

Re: Jailbreakingg

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

Because as soon as a root exploit is released it's often used to jailbreak.

Which given how far and few between jailbreaks are...

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

...and then having the power to fill your house to the brim with free clones of paid stuff, should you so choose.

Jailbreaking to work around OS/carrier lameness, sure. Trying to justify the pirated/infringing apps you warezed and put on your device for free, essentially ripping off developers for their 99c, supremely lame.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh stop being so melodramatic - the product comes the way it was designed. If you bought it, you should have bought it in the knowledge that what it had to offer was fine for you and not with the intent to whine about any possibility that the company - understandably - has denied you form the start.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[JaredOfEuropa]

ripping off developers for their 99c, supremely lame

I never really understood this. You go and get a really expensive phone, then begrudge someone their 99 cents. Or seriously spend more than a few seconds thought on whether or not to buy that "really expensive" $1.99 app. And subsequently get suckered into dropping tens of dollars on in-app purchases in in some freemium game. People are weird...

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

but data should be fweeeeeee!!!!!

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Noughmad]

At big part of it is the feeling that you're special, and that you "beat the system".

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Thanshin]

the product comes the way it was designed. If you bought it, you should have bought it in the knowledge that what it had to offer was fine for you and not with the intent to whine about any possibility that the company - understandably - has denied you form the start.

If they sold it, they should have sold it in the knowledge that the strength of their product's tamper protection was fine for them and not with the intent to whine about any possibility that the buyer - understandably - has broken the weak system.

And yet they whine incessantly.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[93 Escort Wagon]

You're right - you really don't get it.

Most of us who jailbreak aren't interested in stealing apps. Heck, by default those repositories aren't even available to a jailbreaker. Instead, it's about adding functionality. Frankly, look at some of the new iOS 7 features... We jail breakers had those in iOS 5 and 6.

Prior to iOS 7, iPhone apps running on a non-retina iPad were displayed in low res, even though there was a high res "retina" version of the app's images readily available. The fix? A jailbreak App called RetinaPad (which, incidentally, I paid for). A free app, SBSettings, added some quick access toggles to the notification pull down - another useful feature that iOS 7 borrowed.

Want to ssh into your iPhone? Gotta jailbreak it first. Want a decent wifi scanner for troubleshooting? Again, you need to jailbreak. Want to be able to use gestures to replace the home button? Again, you need to jailbreak.

There are lots of reasons for jail breaking that have absolutely nothing to do with theft. They're probably of interest only to a minority of iOS users, but they exist. As iOS matures, those reasons gradually dwindle... but I can't see them ever going away completely.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not your house, you get to rent it. Don't like the locked garage and the cameras in the bedroom? Move out.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

Most people with Jailbreaks i know do it for Apps that the Great Steve does not allow in the Store (for whatever reason, because of american moral overdrive or because they want to do it themself), not for unlicensed software. Jailbreaks getting more and more timeconsuming to maintain (wait on every new iRelease on a matching jailbreak, applying both, avoid accitentally clicking yes somewhere etc), even for "really expensive $1.99" thats not worth it...

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Lumpy]

But this case is a random unknown stranger offers to make you keys for your house. And while they are at it, sets up a shop of stolen goods inside the front door.
How do you know they did not make themselves an extra key?

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

Speaking of not liking reality...

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

It sounds like it would be easier to just buy another phone. Why would anyone ever pay money for such a severely limited device?

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, if you've ever bought a iPhone in certain Asian countries - such as MKB in Bangkok, the phones from small dealers are sold pre-jailbroken and loaded up with pirated Apps, movies and other content, as a "service" to the customer. As phones are frequently sold outright and off plan, this kind of distribution channel is a much higher fraction of the market, than it is in the US , where subsidised phones dominate. This likely represents millions of devices. Given jailbreak downloads are typically 10 million , its at least a very significant fraction, and it wouldn't be unreasonably be a majority.

I strongly suspect the motivation for, and the rate of jailbreaking varies wildly by country.

I'd also hazard a guess, the whilst there are people with pretty reasonable motivations such as the Wi-fi scanner example, they represent a tiny fraction of the jailbroken device owners - most have it done for them for commercial reasons - either explicitly to pirate Apps, or out of ignorance when its done for them because the offer of "free extras" is too good.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[cyber-vandal]

Wifi Analyzer and SwiftKey are two apps that are so useful to me that I will never even consider an Apple phone.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

It's funny. In any other operating evironment you would call these root exploits.
However in the Apple camp it's simply jailbreaking. One does not dear imply that the iphone is insecure :)

Well ... doing it on purpose to your own device it is jailbreaking and is fine. Having it done without your permission or knowledge is pwning and is an exploit.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[kangsterizer]

note that "pirated" games these days generally offer an option to disable or bypass the socalled freemium crap (ie inapp purchases where you have to spend hundreds in order to play the game at all). i'd rather pay $10 from scratch, than being hagged into "rating", "liking on facebook", "paying item X, Z, Y for $100+ that are artificially required to enjoy the game. sometimes its way more than $100.". It's an horrible model.

Heck even games such as battlefield and what not - which costs much more to produce, takes longer and more people "only" cost" about $100 with all DLCs every 3 month for a year or two included. And people hate DLCs.

I therefore fully support pirating any game following this model (then again, i don't have an iphone, and i don't really play games on android, so i'm an angel. still, i get the idea.)

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Nerdfest]

The problem is that you're rewarding a company (known for making extremely high profit on their devices) for locking you out of your hardware. Their attitude towards letting you install the software you want is not going to improve in the future with people doing that.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't, but it sure beats sleeping in the rain.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[tapspace]

In android parlance, it is called "rooting."

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

Thats' what I've been telling the people around, especially those iSheeples..-''Hey, isit after jailbreak all apps are free? I want to get free apps"...Most people tends to relate Jailbreak with pirated apps while it's much much more than that. I truly appreciate the jailbreakers that find the exploit in each iOS version, I still remember the older days JB was so complicated that make Android's root a shame.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

You can turn off in-app purchases if you lack the will power to say no.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

Complain as much as you want: I can copy bits from you, and it won't take anything away from you. I shall continue, and it's highly unlikely you'll be able to stop me. DItto for the other million+ people.

I'm sure you'll feel the same when someone gets their paws on your Bitcoin wallet. It is just a string of 0s and 1s.

BTW, why don't you spend your time creating something useful. Anything at all. And then let everyone come along and copy it for free. We're waiting. And don't give me the "What about Linux?" shit. You're a taker, not a giver. The people who have donated their time and efforts to Linux, some of whom have dedicated their lives to it, are givers and you have not earned the right to compare yourselves to them.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

Wrong, the only time an exploit is used is when the phone is manufactured by a stupid and shortsighted company that locks the bootloader. Otherwise rooting merely refers to installing a new firmware that gives you a way to get root.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

Complain as much as you want: I can copy bits from you, and it won't take anything away from you.

Apart from the revenue I should have got.

I shall continue, and it's highly unlikely you'll be able to stop me. DItto for the other million+ people.

Neither of which makes it right. Just because you can copy someone's digital work and they still have it does not morally justify your actions.

If you want a copy of a digital work, then you should reward the creator for creating it - the fact that they don't lose their bits is irrelevant. Otherwise, why should anyone bother to create any digital work?

Of course some people do make copies and reward the creator, so the creators do continue to create.

If everyone had your attitude, no-one would create any digital products.

As it is, the people that don't pay are leaching off those that do.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

This would only imply that the iPhone as volatile storage where things can be written. Installing a "root kit" is a user-added exploit.

You might call this a socially engineered trojan horse. So yes, the iPhone is vulnerable to stupid users. Maybe your phone has soldered in the entire OS on a ROM and you are safe. Though you don't impress me as someone invulnerable to social engineering with this comment.

Re: Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

You think kindle runs ios? Coz its called jailbreaking there as well.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[noh8rz10]

You're a taker, not a giver.

+1. some people create things, so they have empathy with other people who create things. others are just takers and add no value to society, so they cannot comprehend how their actions hut those that create. like arguing with a rock. good news is, they rooted their own phones and gave them to chinese hackers, in exchange for free angry birds (yes, I bet they download cracked versions of free apps too lol).

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

Not really, Sleeping in the rain is great. plus you can lay under a tarp.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[noh8rz10]

why don't you just not buy the phone? if you don't want to reward the company that makes the phone? or steal the phone? pro tip: if you paid for the phone you've already rewarded them.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[noh8rz10]

It's not your house, you get to rent it. Don't like the locked garage and the cameras in the bedroom? Move out.

accurate. if you rent a house and in the lease it says the garage stays locked and there are cameras in the bedroom, then what do you expect? rent a different house, or buy a different house.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

"Apart from the revenue I should have got." is one big problem in your logic. I have pirated a big pile of stuff through the years. But if I couldn't have pirated them, I would NEVER have bought them. Ever. I don't go to the movies and I don't buy movies but I download and watch them for free sometimes. If I can't watch a Hollywood movie, either because I can't find a pirated version with good enough image quality or because the movie is so incredibly bad that I have to stop watching (which happens more and more by the way) I go and watch some fan-movie, documentary or something else.

So I'm arguing that Hollywood haven't lost a dime because of me. I'm not paying them whether I'm pirating or not.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

What a bunch of crap. I create software all the time. Right now as I ramble on Slashdot I'm writing some software to help with someone's PhD research. Since there was nothing suitable already available, and nobody else in the department had the skills, the researcher would have had to hire someone.

But they happened to have a casual conversation with me about this, and I asked to see their draft paper to find out what was missing. The following evening, I said, "Oh, I can do that." And then I did it. And do you know what I charged for it? Nothing. And do you know why I charged nothing? Because I can. Because I have the skills, and I'm not going to squander those skills like some primitive who thinks they're a special snowflake to be valued. It's not as if they're exploiting me: when the sum of human scholarship is increased, everybody wins.

So, fuck you and your artificial scarcity. If someone wants to pay you to write software, good for you and good for them. I would never force you to do anything. But I will do as much as I can for free, and I'll take anything I can, too. If you have a problem with this, you can... cry, perhaps? IDK. What is it that infants normally do during the, "BUT IT'S MINE!!!" phase of early development?

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean any phone you buy from a carrier in the US? If you're carrying any phone from Verizon, AT&T, etc etc etc then you're just a hypocrite and a stinking liar.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Nyder]

It's more a case of regaining entry after being locked out of your own house, rather than someone else breaking in.

Except that the burglar could use the same route.

Or the police, or the NSA or the FBI, etc....

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

IT'S A TARP!!!

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Nyder]

You're a taker, not a giver.

+1. some people create things, so they have empathy with other people who create things. others are just takers and add no value to society, so they cannot comprehend how their actions hut those that create. like arguing with a rock. good news is, they rooted their own phones and gave them to chinese hackers, in exchange for free angry birds (yes, I bet they download cracked versions of free apps too lol).

Takers & givers. Pitchers & Catchers, Tops & Bottoms. Good & Evil. Left & right. 1's & 0's.

You do realize that most of life is a binary system and you can't generally have one without the other?

In other words, some people give, some people take. It's part of life. If you feel superior because you are one and not the other, then you are missing out on how life really works.

Does that person downloading a pirated app really hurt the developer? No it doesn't. That person most likely doesn't pay for software, so the developer would never get money from him. But oddly enough, there is enough people who have no problem paying for stuff, and that is why developers & producers make money because there is enough people buying to turn profit. It has always been this way. Thinking your superior because you pay for stuff is deluding yourself. Thinking your smarter because you don't pay for stuff is also deluding yourself. We are just all playing our parts in life.

Good software/music/movies sell and make money. Crappy software/music/movies don't sell and they blame it on people pirating the stuff then the fact they made some crappy software/music/movies.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

By that token, nobody has a right to their life, to the physical property in their homes, or to not be assaulted/raped because the laws of physics does not prevent that.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[mlts]

Even more basic... want ad blocking? Jailbreak. Want some privacy? JB time. Jailbreaking allows one to use their device, which they paid for (in one way or another) as they see fit.

iBlacklist is another useful feature, only available by jailbreaking. Yes, I can block callers by creating contacts, but it gets old having a bunch of "zzzzRoboCaller" entries in my contacts as opposed to just one blacklist that does the job in a few taps.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

Or you could just get a God Damn Android and be done with it.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Rick Zeman]

Wifi Analyzer and SwiftKey are two apps that are so useful to me that I will never even consider an Apple phone.

Wow. After switching from Android to iOS those are the ONLY two apps I miss...not enough to regret switching, though.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[mlts]

There is one downside of "free" apps. When I read some various iPhone forums, it is amazing how many people get stung by rogue IPAs and end up having to DFU restore.

There is a reason for moderated/curated app stores, and yes, other places might have other people's app for free, but those apps might just bring along more than just the program itself.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Nyder]

But this case is a random unknown stranger offers to make you keys for your house. And while they are at it, sets up a shop of stolen goods inside the front door.
How do you know they did not make themselves an extra key?

Just curious, when you put this argument out, did you really think it applied? Explain how a house is like an iPad or iPhone? Explain how your house is locked down like iOS? You can't, because it's not. Banks/realtors do not sell you a house and tell you that the basement is off limits. That you can't park cars in the garage, even though there is room to do so. That you can only use a certain type of glass when you replace the windows. That you can't remodel your house.

You understand how they do not apply with each other?

Re: Jailbreakingg

[Threni]

No they just need to pick up the phone.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[plover]

Despite the name, a rootkit does not generally refer to a generic "tool for getting root" on an unmodified device.

A rootkit is a certain type of malware that hides itself inside the OS by modifying the OS, preventing userland views of its presence. For example, if you ask the OS for a list of files in a folder because you want to see if you have malware on it, the modified file system will conveniently skip listing the files containing the filesystem modifications. How is an anti-virus program supposed to scan for wormy.dll if the OS never tells it that wormy.dll exists?

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

You must not be able to read, read what he replied to.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[quacking duck]

iBlacklist is another useful feature, only available by jailbreaking. Yes, I can block callers by creating contacts, but it gets old having a bunch of "zzzzRoboCaller" entries in my contacts as opposed to just one blacklist that does the job in a few taps.

Glancing quickly at the iBlacklist app, you need to create contacts to blacklist (or whitelist) them anyway.

In any event, you don't need to create separate contacts for every robocaller. I'm still on iOS6 and don't have the proper call block function that was added in iOS7, but I have a single contact for them called "spammer", every time an unknown number fails the 800notes.com / whocallsme.com lookup test it gets added to this contact in just a few taps as well. It has a silent ringtone and custom vibration pattern so faint I never feel it. I have about three dozen numbers listed in that one spam contact.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

You never understood it? Well, the "expensive phone" is tangible. The trash in the app store is not, and people don't want to pay to try out trash and delete it moments later. Software is information, and information wants to be free.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[jo_ham]

Actually, I do refer to this as root exploiting, but if I point that out (as I have in the past) and praised Apple for closing the security hole I get jumped on by Android fanboys calling me an enemy of freedom.

In other words, they care about exploits and security when it's convenient, but not when it's in any way in conflict with bashing Apple.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[znrt]

Apart from the revenue I should have got.

should you? oh, because you said so? you have no right to get a revenue from your work, you only have the right to try. if it doesn't work, don't blame it on others.

Neither of which makes it right.

nor wrong.

Just because you can copy someone's digital work and they still have it does not morally justify your actions.

if you find it's inmoral, don't do it. what i find morally injustifiable is you wanting to impose your personal morals on others. keep them for yourself.

If you want a copy of a digital work, then you should reward the creator for creating it

no, see above.

further, I didn't ask the creator for anything.

even further, the creator didn't "reward" the zillions of people whose effort he himself used in order to produce his digital work.

the fact that they don't lose their bits is irrelevant.

it isn't. this is a necessary condition for "theft" in any legal code. you IP zealots want to equate copying with theft and that's why you come up with this "loss of rightful revenue" crap, which isn't rightful at all.

Otherwise, why should anyone bother to create any digital work?

exactly. why should they? to cry for some revenue they think themselves entitled to? funny.

fact is many of them do it just because they want. others because they actually do get a revenue. so what?

If everyone had your attitude, no-one would create any digital products.

it's not an attitude, it's elementary common sense and it is pervasive. and still ... people keeps creating.

As it is, the people that don't pay are leaching off those that do.

besides ignoring (or twisting) reality you are intending to insult a lot of people with this. i would say it is inmoral, if it weren't just lame.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[mlts]

Now that would be an app whose time has come for iOS -- something like Mr. Number that checks the robodialer databases and blocks the number, preferably with a pickup and hangup (just so the robodialer tries to get a live person on the ACD.)

Re: Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

Jailbreak != root exploit. It starts by getting root but then involved using that privilege to install a bunch of patches to allow installation of apps from outside the App Store.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[jon3k]

With many months of work with physical access to the device and then intentionally loading apps which allow you to load other apps while TETHERED via USB to a computer. And this makes the iPhone "insecure"?

lol.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[phrostie]

i'm no longer on an iphone, but it was itunes that i hated.
with itunes i had to reboot into windows and then argue with itunes if it was the same PC i used last time.
all i wanted to do was drag and drop my mp3's onto my phone so i could listen to them.

the music player on cydia(i don't remember what it was called) let me do that.

once jailbroken, iphones aren't so bad.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

keep whining, trash.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[jellomizer]

Well for one, being that it took months for people to get it rooted, means it probably isn't that insecure. Second the level of effort making it a Local break in vs. a Remote break in, is a big deal too.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[mlts]

I think one reason is that a proper jailbreak isn't just clicking on something and up pops a pound sign, or something happens allowing a chrooted su executable to be slid into /system/xbin.

A jailbreak on the iPhone is a bigger PITA, in general, than root in Android that for the simple reason that iOS has almost no userland as we know it. Plus, unlike Android where the security model is unaffected by rooting, other than a Trojan asking for root with a su prompt [1], iOS jailbreaks might affect the entire security model of the device, where one app going rogue can easily cause a lot of damage once the jails are gone.

So, rooting and jailbreaking, can be considered completely different things, as jailbreaking definitely constitutes getting root access, as well as several other exploits to get out of the BSD chroots.

Six of one, half a dozen of the other. Apple's model works because they only allow apps to come in from the App Store (for the most part), and the store is actively moderated. Android's model relies less on the security of where the apps came from, but what the apps want as permission [2].

[1]: Even a Trojan asking for a su prompt is partially mitigated because there is a SUPERUSER permission that root-using apps declare in the Play Store store, it is obvious that anyone downloading that app that it might want root access, and without that permission, most su programs can be configured to disallow root access.

[2]: Of course, this is where Android's model is weak, not in security, but in the human factor. It is easy for someone nontechnical to not read, nor just not bother reading the permissions of a fleshlight app they downloaded, then wonder how they got so compromised.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[fatphil]

> Banks/realtors do not sell you a house and [...]

They don't always even sell you a house full stop. In no country where I've lived do banks or realtors sell you the house, they merely act as agents (and in fact in some of the countries the term for them is not "realtor", but explicitly contains the word "agent"). Often, even the vendor isn't selling the property /per se/, he's just selling you the right to live there for a limited period of time (which might be 100 years, but it's still leasehold, not freehold).

> That you can only use a certain type of glass when you replace the windows. That you can't remodel your house.

Where I live, it's precisely that way. Way stricter. I gather from P&T's Bullshit episode on lawns that there are similar kinds of cases in the US.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[mlts]

Old school JB people dislike the app pirates. Once, it was discussed about having a jailbreak actively disallow rogue installer apps. However, this was vetoed because it would create a "jailbreak the jailbreak" arms race.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[jareth-0205]

Then let us all behave like you, and then there will be no strings of bits to copy anymore.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[cyberchondriac]

Because some of us just a solid phone, with a few nifty features, not a full-blown handheld customizable computer.
The thing is, flexibility and stability are generally diametrically opposed. By way of example, devices that run software glitch more often than those that use only locked-in firmware.
I am neither an apple nor an android fanboi, I've had (and have) both. My Galaxy S1 crashed way too often, so the customizability wasn't worth it to me. Even my Nexus 7 tab which I have now needs a reboot far more often than my iPhone5.
I think I have best of both worlds: I have a phone that's rock stable in case of emergency, but still has smartphone capability; and I have my Nexus 7 as my toy on which I can do or change anything, customized launcher, lockscreen, live wallpaper, root, etc.. but isn't critical to me if acts up.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[LMariachi]

That person most likely doesn't pay for software, so the developer would never get money from him.

I think that’s far more valid for a game that retails for $59.95 or a software package that’s $299 than 99c iPhone apps. I understand jailbreaking as a means to run unapproved apps, but wanting to get away with nickel-&-dime shit on your expensive phone is just weird.

EDIT: Obligatory bewilderment at Slashdot comments not understanding Unicode on the cusp of A.D. 2014.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[dlingman]

I'm certainly hoping that you've not pirated any apps that have a server side component. I pay for my servers, and for the bandwidth and drive space associated with it.

Paying customers give me the ability to pay for that. Pirate users of my apps ARE a direct cost to me. If you're one of them, you ARE harming me. If you post anything on a feedback page, or click on my support link, or email me to complain - you're costing me time and money that should be spent on my actual, paying customers.

Overall though, if you never would have paid for it anyways, then why not just do without it? If it's not good enough to pay $0.99 for, then why are you even bothering to download and install it - especially in the knowledge that the cracked version might be carrying something truly nasty along with it?

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

No, actually, in the apple camp, these are called root exploits. It's only 12 year olds who want to install pirated apps that call this jailbreaking.

Re: Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

You realise that's pretty much exactly the definition of a root exploit, right?

Re: Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

You are a bit off. For example Immix Wireless carries completely unlocked phones (my galaxy S and S3 from them were even the international variety). You can't lump all US carriers together.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[rhazz]

In other words, some people give, some people take. It's part of life. If you feel superior because you are one and not the other, then you are missing out on how life really works.

I would say they are morally superior for contributing to the system rather than leeching off it. The system would work fine if everyone contributed. It wouldn't work at all if everybody leeched.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[nurb432]

And then you have people that create things, give them away and expect the same in return.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

It's more a case of giving up your home and giving it away and then trying to get back in after the new owner changes the locks. Why did you give it up in the first place? Quit crying. Didn't you know it was a locked down device when you bought it? OTOH - if you're hacking on it for hackings sake, then go for it.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Solandri]

In other words, some people give, some people take. It's part of life. If you feel superior because you are one and not the other, then you are missing out on how life really works.

Everyone gives and takes. Every legitimate economic transaction involves both giving something and receiving something. So anyone with a significant non-criminal income is also a giver. You have to give something to earn money. Contrary to the implications of this thread, it's actually the artist and software communities which are the exception to the rule, because they can work to create something once and give it away repeatedly for more money. Most regular people have to constantly give away stuff (e.g. their labor) every time they want more money.

So despite being a programmer and photographer, I'd take exception to the characterization in this thread that the programmer/artist is the giver and the pirate is the taker. If you look at it based on net work vs income ratios, most of the highly successful programmers and artists are takers. Piracy is rampant because of the mismatch between how much they charge for their work, and how much society feels it should cost given their success.

The best way to see this problem in action without resorting to the piracy extreme (by which point it's so distorted it's not educational) is to look at how things work in hardware. When VCRs first came out, they cost over $1000. They were incredibly popular and successful, and eventually every Western household had one (if not several). More sales meant you could amortize R&D costs over more units, you could buy more supplies meaning discounts for bulk purchases, and it also meant more competition which insured those manufacturing savings were passed on to the customer. By the time the DVD player came out, VCRs had dropped to about $20.

That's the kind of price drop people expect from successful products, and aren't seeing with software or music or movies. And that's why they feel justified pirating it.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[BasilBrush]

Pretty obviously he bought it because for him it's the best phone for the money. Yes, it is't perfect for him without a jailbreak, and it's better with the jailbreak,

But clearly the competitor phones are worse.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[BasilBrush]

Which one? Android spies on people far more than iOS does. It's Google's business model to do so.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

It's more a case of regaining entry after being locked out of your own house, rather than someone else breaking in.

Except that the burglar could use the same route.

Uh, the jailbreak requires you to temporarily remove your passcode (read the instructions!) -- a burglar (or FBI) that can do that already has access to everything of value on the phone.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

I used to be annoyed that everything I posted said "sent from my Blackberry on the Blah Blah Network" but I didn't get people to root my phone to remove it. That would be dumb.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[tibman]

I wouldn't say that is anything new. Downloading and installing software from a shady site onto a computing device has been going on for decades.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

If your app is basically a server-side service, I assume you're selling accounts to paying users. I'm not going to use someone else's account, so you're okay there. I try to keep everything on the client anyway.

(Having said this, If features are placed server-side blatantly only to take control away from the user, I might use the software anyway - most obvious case is server-side DRM. I consider the current "cloud" fashion to be morally abhorrent, and therefore it is ethical to try to defeat it.)

As to asking for support, I try to avoid that, but if you have a complex app which requires complex on-going advice, have you thought of selling support contracts? Asking new e-mail addresses to provide their licence number with support requests? I mean, I have the right to ask you whatever I want - just as you me. It's then your responsibility to decide whether you want to answer or not. Looked at the other way, you have the right to ask users to ask for helpful feedback to increase the quality of your app, and users have the choice whether to provide the detailed bug reports etc. which result in improvements to your software.

And why on earth should I have to "do without" just because you tell me to? Why don't you do without $3 a day and buy me a coffee instead. Finally, FUD about pirated apps/movies/music possibly having malware doesn't work when the industry associations do it either.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[kimvette]

> Nobody has a right to "intellectual property", almost all of which in every case is building on the work of others.

The Constitution grants provisions for patents and copyrights protecting a monopoly for a limited time because it is recognized that people DO have the right to profit from their work. The reason the term is limited (in theory it's limited) is to promote the creation of useful arts and science for the public domain. It's a fair exchange and everyone should recognize that people who work for a living deserve to get paid - this is a case where entitlement IS genuinely deserved.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[kimvette]

"Piracy" often removes the incentive to create useful arts and sciences. Why bother working if you can't make a living at it? Don't give me bullshit about doing what one loves for a career - at the end of the day the reason every one of us works is to get paid. Period. We all have bills to pay and we all value our time.

To deny someone a measly $.99 or $1.99 for an app which cost a minimum of tens of thousands to develop is pathetic - and if everyone rips it off, you probably won't see a version 2.0 of the app.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[ArbitraryName]

Because iOS has the specific apps they want to use.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[ArbitraryName]

I guess you've never lived somewhere with an HOA. Exactly those sorts of terms are explicitly spelled out in the deed. There are a surprising number of parallels between HOA deed restrictions and an EULA.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[fiscoca]

iPhone is not insecure at all.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[rocket rancher]

Hmmm. I'm not calling you a hypocrite (at least, not yet) but you'd be up in fucking arms if somebody violated the GPL, right? But not Apple's ToS -- that doesn't apply to criminals. It's just words on a page that a criminal has to scroll past to get to the "I Accept" button so that he can start cracking the device that he just agreed not to crack. You make some (weak) rationalizations for why it's ok for criminals to break the ToS, but you just highlight the real problem. Here's a clue: You can't maintain one ethical standard for hackers and a different standard for everybody else, dude. Not if you want to be taken seriously, anyway.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Dixie_Flatline]

This person may not have the right to make money off of their work, but if they don't want to give it away, you have no right to TAKE it.

If they choose to offer it up for donations, that's their business. If they want to charge for it, that's also their business. But the moment you want to use their product, you should be bound by their rules.

When you go to buy a phone, do you only pay the cost of materials? Apparently, that's all you think it's worth, since you're arguing that taking the 'bits' doesn't deprive anyone of anything. Well, if you go and get a phone, maybe you should just pay for the cost of the sand that it took to make the silicon and that's it, hmm? That's all that's really in there, after all: silicon, some plastic, some aluminum and a nice layer of bits. That's, what, $50 worth of materials?

The value isn't the bits, the value is the WORK. This is the same reason why I pay for a haircut, despite the fact that I leave with LESS than when I came in.

The only one imposing anything on anyone else is you. The author of a work that has posted it in an app store in an attempt to make revenue is playing by all the rules in their game--you're the one circumventing them and it's bullshit. You have no moral justification for your actions. If you use the application that was made, pay for it. If you don't, don't. But don't try to tell me that you get to use it and not pay for it.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Dixie_Flatline]

You don't need to create a contact in iOS 7. Just find the number after the call is done and ask for it to be blocked. It's near the bottom.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[MildlyTangy]

lol, you must be confused about the device in question. Its an iphone.

You never had entry to the house in the first place, the house was paid for by you, but you have no keys, are only granted entry into the house upon the whim of the house designer/builder. You are told how to live in your house, you are told how to use your house, and under no uncertain terms are you to EVER modify your house to the way you like...if you do so, all manufacturing warranty of said house is null and void.

They call it Jailbreaking for a reason.

Enjoy your jail, lol.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

You start off with the assumption that the person who wrote the software gets to write rules about how the software is distributed. This is begging the question.

IF the author should have such a right then everything you say is true. I contend that the author should have no such right.

Your iPhone argument is bullshit. I can buy a second hand iPhone from anyone I please for whatever price they're willing to sell it me for - and no price will reflect the millions of years of evolution and thousands of years of civilisation which got us to the point of being able to build iPhones. As to Apple, if they want to sell it to me for more than the price of components, they're perfectly within their rights - that was easy, wasn't it?

Re:Jailbreakingg

[MildlyTangy]

wait, hang on there a second...

In iLand you have to PAY for angry birds?? really? WTF!

Re:Jailbreakingg

[MildlyTangy]

I find this confusing.....why did Tim say that you are not allowed a wifi scanner?

How does adding a wifi scanner to the app store "duplicate core functionality", or do other ebil nasty unapple things?

Why the hate apple?

Re:Jailbreakingg

[LocalH]

You do realize that most of life is a binary system and you can't generally have one without the other?

Very little in life is truly binary.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

Thinking your superior because you pay for stuff is deluding yourself. Thinking your smarter because you don't pay for stuff is also deluding yourself

You're sure about all that?

Re:Jailbreakingg

[znrt]

But the moment you want to use their product, you should be bound by their rules

you blurry the difference between "use" and "own" in the same way GP deliberately confuses "copy" and "theft".

i simply don't buy this false assumption, and your example just sits on top of it. thanks.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[jeremyp]

Then let us all behave like you, and then there will be no strings of bits to copy anymore.

There will be strings of bits to copy, but it will all be amateur shit that nobody wants to see/hear/use, or it will be riddled with advertisements and product placements.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[jareth-0205]

Preaching to the converted... copyright has it's problems (mainly around its length), but it's an absolutely necessary construct.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[jeremyp]

A better option than pirating is to delete the app from your phone and post a negative review on the app store to warn other people off.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[93 Escort Wagon]

Hmmm. I'm not calling you a hypocrite (at least, not yet) but you'd be up in fucking arms if somebody violated the GPL, right? But not Apple's TOS ...

Were you replying to me?

Courts in the US have held that jailbreaking is legal, regardless of a manufacturer's TOS. Sensibly, the wrongdoing comes with the activities a person chooses to do after jailbreaking - such as pirating apps.

When a TOS runs counter to the law, it's the TOS that falls down.

But to answer the actual question: I'm not an advocate for the GPL, personally. But in a case where a violation of the GPL (or any license) is prosecutable in court... yeah, if you break the actual law you have to deal with the penalty. However that's non sequitur in the context of jailbreaking. I'm not breaking the law.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[tlhIngan]

I never really understood this. You go and get a really expensive phone, then begrudge someone their 99 cents. Or seriously spend more than a few seconds thought on whether or not to buy that "really expensive" $1.99 app. And subsequently get suckered into dropping tens of dollars on in-app purchases in in some freemium game. People are weird...

Or why bother doing it on iOS - Android is where the piracy scene is at - with piracy levels around the PC level (90%+). I mean, why go through the hassles of jailbreaking when you're really just going to expose your phone to the same crap that lets Android malware spread far and wide? Why not just do it on Android where it's not just permitted, but often encouraged by "sideloading"?

All that Taig and this jailbreak has shown is that people jailbreak for piracy purposes. And hell, Taig may not have the exploits, but given that China is where Android malware runs rampant, do you really trust that it's all nicely sandboxed?

Hell, even the traditional reasons for jailbreaking aren't ready yet - Cydia isn't quite iOS7 ready. And MobileSubstrate isn't, either. (MS is a library that lets jailbroken apps cleanly and safely hook into the OS without causing too much disaster). Which means this jailbreak is only useful for... pirated apps.

And Apple is bound to use this as a perfect reason on why jailbreaking should not be allowed - piracy and security. Oh wait, they already did. This jailbreak just proved their point!

Re:Jailbreakingg

[dimko]

Did it come to you, that its not always about this? I mean, I got "jail broken" phone from producer of the phone. I paid +10 Euro for it. I have now all legit programs on my Android, for which I have actually paid. I wanted to install Linux in chroot in it. So I did. I got Linux in my pocket. Does it make me a pirate?

Re:Jailbreakingg

[the_B0fh]

There needs to be an idiot tag or "not living in this reality" for moderation.

Re: Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

A stereotypical defense of piracy/copyright infringement/license infringement.

Tangibility aside, it takes reasonable time and effort to create software (and other works), and claiming that it's just "information that wants to be free" is horseshit, and mostly an excuse for obtaining and using paid software for free. Many comments are entirely correct - it's not lost sales or costing developers revenue necessarily, but the appropriate course of action one should take if you disagree with pricing, licensing, revenue model, etc to the point of infringing, is to simply not use/consume the software. There's not a reasonable defense to argue that because you disagree with something that you just get it all for free because well fuck you I wouldn't pay for it anyway.

Also, the argument that people will just create stuff anyway, well, try making any sort of living if you spend years making stuff others merely think they're entitled to because they wouldn't pay f

Re: Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

for it anyway.

If everyone held this attitude then I'd expect large creative, development and support industries would disappear fairly quickly. It's ok, though, because you got your free stuff and felt the need to hide behind some line about not having other people's morality pushed onto you. It's not just someone's morality, it's the part of the foundations of human civilization.

Re: Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

but horseshit.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

Clearly. I mean they aren't Apple. Sheesh.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[TheOneFreeman]

The other funny thing is that to get root access or flashing custom firmware to one's Android device instead of using the term rootkits and exploits it's called "rooting", it's the same problem either way: no major mobile platform is truly open, no matter what the marketing departments of said platforms spin it as. This whole scene reminds me of the early PC era where Apple was locking off its platform and dominating sales until IBM came and invented the open PC architecture that we all use today (although it became itself a locked-in vendor until the clones took it out of the consumer space with MS supporting both sides of the playing field). Although with the standardisation of component suppliers, SoC featuresets and form factors I do think the day of the modular smartphone/tablet is nearer than many would usually expect, then we'll probably be able to breathe more freely.

Re: Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think anyone pirates 99cent software, I think they want software that costs an outrages price like 17.99 to try it out before purchasing it. I know personal I have purchased a high price software to later find out it doesn't work or crashes then I can't get a refund so I'm out like 20 dollars.

Re:Jailbreakingg

[Anonymous Coward]

Except you can not block anonymous or blocked caller id messages. For this you need a jailbreak app such as iBlacklist. Apple made a deal with the telco's to not allow blocking of spam phone calles since the telco's make money off of them.

remotely disabled?

[Anonymous Coward]

We have decided to remotely disable the default installation of TaiG in China for further investigations on the piracy issue.

What else can the team do remotely?

Re:remotely disabled?

[amnezick]

I think what they mean is that after the jailbreak a program runs just on that first boot to install third-party software like Cydia. It has to download it from somewhere so by "remote" they mean they disabled the URL or they removed the URL from a list stored on some server which the program uses.

Oh, I almost forgot they can read your kinky e-mails too.

Confusing summary

[wonkey_monkey]

Evad3rs' new iOS 7 jailbreak featured a Chinese app store that sold pirated software, and which was pulled from Evasi0n7 soon after launch.

Evasi0n7 is the name of the jailbreak?

Latest rumors say that the exploit used for Evasi0n7 was stolen by a certain person, offered up for sale, so the Evad3rs did a deal with TaiG instead.

TaiG is the name of the Chinese app store? Who's the "certain person," and why does them stealing it lead ("...so...") to the jail break creators doing this deal with TaiG?

Jay 'Saurik' Freeman of Cydia meanwhile isn't happy about the whole thing, saying he was given no time to test Evasi0n7."

What's Cydia, and why is it important that they have time to test the jailbreak?

Re:Confusing summary

[Anonymous Coward]

Just click on the link. The single Twitter post should explain everything.

In other news, great job Slashdot. We need more submissions like this.

Re:Confusing summary

[derfy]

Shh, don't encourage dupes!

Re:Confusing summary

[Anonymous Coward]

Evad3rs' new iOS 7 jailbreak featured a Chinese app store that sold pirated software, and which was pulled from Evasi0n7 soon after launch.

Evasi0n7 is the name of the jailbreak?

Latest rumors say that the exploit used for Evasi0n7 was stolen by a certain person, offered up for sale, so the Evad3rs did a deal with TaiG instead.

TaiG is the name of the Chinese app store? Who's the "certain person," and why does them stealing it lead ("...so...") to the jail break creators doing this deal with TaiG?

Jay 'Saurik' Freeman of Cydia meanwhile isn't happy about the whole thing, saying he was given no time to test Evasi0n7."

What's Cydia, and why is it important that they have time to test the jailbreak?

The summary can be confusing for people that have no prior knowledge of these names (as I guess many tech story summaries would be if you don't know the subject). Luckily there is a fairly short article linked in said summary that makes it all fairly clear.

Re:Confusing summary

[Anonymous Coward]

I, too, had great difficulty comprehending this post. I'm sure it must be some secret code.

Re:Confusing summary

[wonkey_monkey]

It's like saying "What's Full House?" in the 90s.

A gameshow hosted by Bob Monkhouse. Every knows that.

You don't have to like it, but do you live under a rock?

Even if I knew what Cydia was (which I vaguely do, now), that still wouldn't tell me why they were upset that they hadn't had time to test the jailbreak.

Re:Confusing summary

[wonkey_monkey]

Luckily there is a fairly short Slashdotted article linked in said summary that makes it all fairly clear.

FTFY :)

Re: Confusing summary

[Anonymous Coward]

You are complaining that "geek" (at least wannabe geek) news site posts a short article that is too geeky for the general audience!? If the topic does not concern you enough to have enough background knowledge to make heads or tails of this post, it probably isn't for you. Just read the next one.

Re:Confusing summary

[Anonymous Coward]

I too have no idea what Cydia is.

It's great that you're so well versed in pop culture and niche technology products, but at least the most minimum of description could be included.

Re:Confusing summary

[vedavis]

(If you cannot comprehend,) Move along, nothing to see here. - Officer Barbrady.

Re: Confusing summary

[Anonymous Coward]

Summaries should summarize and provide a bit of context. The fact that the audience may or may not have familiarity with this particular topic is not an excuse to get lazy. Look at that summary from yesterday about that PR manager that said something about AIDS. It was like word soup! It's not hard to parenthesize a bit of context. "did a deal with TaiG, a group, instead. Cydia, , isn't happy because he didn't get to test." Something like that wouldn't be hard.

Re:Confusing summary

[Anonymous Coward]

It's seems that newfag summer is now perpetual on Slashdot... The only thing that would have made your post stupider is if you had logged in via Twatter.

Re:Confusing summary

[Yunzil]

Glad I'm not the only one.

Re:Confusing summary

[lhunath]

Evasi0n7 is the name of the method used to apply a tethered jailbreak to the phone. The 7 is for iOS 7. The jailbreak is what disables the security features that lock people out of their own device.

TaiG is the name of a "store" the distributes Chinese applications, similar to Cydia, the store that is currently considered to be the "default" for distributing applications on jailbroken devices. Aside from using Cydia or TaiG, you can also put apps on the device manually or use other stores / distributions.

The deal with TaiG was not a result of any stealing. Evasi0n (the team that made the Evasi0n7 method) had been approached by TaiG with an offer of bundling their store instead of Cydia (which doesn't have a lot of Chinese content) for Chinese users only. Terms of the deal included that TaiG would not be allowed to distribute any "pirated" applications. Evasi0n's rational was that without TaiG on the device, most Chinese users would proceed to install an app store that did provide "pirated" apps and this way they would be condoning a "non-pirating" app store to the huge Chinese jailbreak audience. In exchange for bundling TaiG and therefore giving TaiG a huge userbase in China, Evasi0n was offered a lump of money.

Unfortunately, it turns out after the fact that some pirated apps were spotted on TaiG. Evasi0n reported these to TaiG ASAP and they were removed. You can imagine the trolling that ensued especially from competing jailbreak teams.

Other teams working on a jailbreak method in parallel to Evasi0n were also given this offer from TaiG. In fact, another team was getting a jailbreak release ready with a similar, stolen or different method, I don't know, but since they were getting close to a release, Evasi0n decided to fast-track their working method and release a jailbreak early. The up-side of an early release was that they'd get TaiG's money and they'd get the credit for the jailbreak. The down-side is that the huge volume of apps written for jailbroken devices hadn't been tested and fixed to work on iOS 7 yet, including "Cydia". iOS compatibility is even more crucial for jailbroken apps than for standard iOS apps since they often use undocumented API which is obviously very volatile across iOS versions.

As a result of Evasi0n's early release, a bunch of people jailbroke their device only to find that almost all of the apps written for jailbroken devices that they were installing crashed or cashed their phones to break - since, as I said, they weren't updated for iOS 7.

TL;DR - Evasi0n worked really hard to find a method for jailbreaking, figured they deserved some money for their effort, figured in the mean time they'd condone a safe store to the Chinese, saw their chance at success slip away as other teams were gearing up to steal the glory and released before the developer community was ready, causing breakage and mayhem, never mind the trolling about the sudden appearance of a Chinese app store instead of Cydia.

For Evasi0n's side of the story, read http://evasi0n.com/l.html

Re:Confusing summary

[Anonymous Coward]

Just click on the link. The single Twitter post should explain everything.

TL;DR

Re: Confusing summary

[Anonymous Coward]

Come on. The summary is bullshit. 'Evad3rs' and 'Evasi0n7'? Who the fuck is supposed to have any idea who or what those are? And really, those names are pathetic, unless all these 'hackers' are 12-year-olds. Substituting numbers for letters in online tags stopped being cool about a decade ago.

And even the article is a bit messed up:

A newly-released jailbreak that opens up Apple's iOS 7 mobile operating system from system restrictions has been forced to backtrack on its decision to partner with an app store that offers pirated software.

The -jailbreak- was forced to backtrack on its decision? What, is it sentient or something?

And finally, there's no mention of rumors that a 'certain person' stole the hack or any explanation of why that could have caused Evad3rs to contract with Taig. I'm guessing it's simply because they thought the Chinese user base might appreciate using a Chinese app store, or perhaps there was some cash involved.

Re:Confusing summary

[Anonymous Coward]

Cydia matters little, but mobile substrate, a library that *many* tweaks depend on is developed by the same guy and is partly incompatible to this jailbreak.

Re:Confusing summary

[tapspace]

I suppose it's my knowledge of modern computer security that has lead me to know more about Cydia and rooting in general than the average slashtard. My mistake.

Not touching it.

[Lumpy]

A jailbreak comes out from a unproven group, Only fools are installing this one.

Re: Not touching it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Considering that this is the group that released ios6 jailbreak, its hardly unknown. In fact it is the best known group of ios hackers. They just sold out to some chinese company and are now trying to backtrack to save their street cred.

Re: Not touching it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Not true. Please research jailbraking and see that they are the newest to the scene and still unproven.

Re: Not touching it.

[Anonymous Coward]

This jailbreak was released by the evad3rs, the same group that released the iOS 6.x jailbreak. Their members are Pimskeks, Planetbeing, Pod2g and MuscleNerd, all long standing and well known players in the jailbreak scene. MuscleNerd and Planetbeing were members of the former iPhone Dev Team, the group behind Reds0w, along with Saurik and Geohot (to name just a few).

So the evad3rs are neither "newest to the scene" nor "still unproven". And it's "jailbreaking", not "jailbraking".

So follow your own advice, ignorant prick, and go educate yourself.

Re:Not touching it.

[Christian Henry]

A jailbreak comes out from a unproven group, Only fools are installing this one.

Unproven group? You mean, the same "unproven" group that released a highly popular, untethered IOS 6 jailbreak?

That has been rock solid on my old iPad 2 for several months?

Uh, okay....

Re:Not touching it.

[Anonymous Coward]

It is a very proven group who's members include people from the old iphone dev team who did most of the ios jailbreaking for a long time.

Re:Not touching it.

[llamahunter]

Erm... MuscleNerd, pod2g, and planetbeing are hardly 'unproven' in the jailbreak community.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Send touch events and capture other apps screen ?

[Anonymous Coward]

On a jailbroken device (in the past version at least), is it possible to have a app 1/ capture the screen of another application 2/ send touch events to this application 3/ do 1 and 2 while off screen ?

Evasi0ns response

[dave1102]

I actually made an account just to post this -- evasi0n's response to all the criticism/speculation: http://evasi0n.com/l.html

Re:Evasi0ns response

[Anonymous Coward]

You didn't need an account to post that.

Re:Evasi0ns response

[Anonymous Coward]

S/he must be here from reddit.

Re:Evasi0ns response

[Anonymous Coward]

At least we now know the range of *really new* userids.

Re:Evasi0ns response

[MildlyTangy]

Welcome to Slashdot!

ProTip: You dont need an account to poast on Slashdot.

Welcome to Slashdot!

Jailbreak vs Rooting

[tuppe666]

In android parlance, it is called "rooting."

Apple treats you as a criminal...and apparently the users act like them, it is done through breaking the weak security of the iOS operating system, often to return basic features.

Google gives you (the option) of control, and supplies ample warning before the user chooses to this, it is an option on some phones...even a selling point, mainly used to load none play applications (Android is Eden...with gates).

Basically nothing like each other.

Re:Jailbreak vs Rooting

[GrammarPoliceChief]

Apple treats you as a criminal? I'm sorry but you are simply trolling. iOS is designed for the masses. They do not want problematic user problems, they do not want many ways to do the same task, they should not have to care about the OS. I'm pretty happy with Apples way that they created their ecosystem, it is fair for both the consumer and the developer. Android is difficult if not impossible to root on many devices. Some even come with a fuse on the main SOC package that detects if the phone has been rooted.

Re:Jailbreak vs Rooting

[Anonymous Coward]

There are other advantages to having Root on Android, besides JUST sideloading apps.

For instance, if you want to change app permissions, you MUST have root to run the tools. If you want to update or remove baked in apps, you MUST have root to do this the right way. If you want to install a mobile linux distro, you NEED root.

The user should not be wholly locked out of actually OWNING the device, which is exactly what strictly enforced user controls like those enacted in Android and iOS do. They prevent you from owning the device, so that either the carrier or the appstore gatekeepers do the owning for you, so that they can regulate your use and use patterns.

Many people are happy for the homogenization in the user experience that such shenanigans offer, and enforcing limited user for primary operation is simply smart given the abusive nature of software in general these days, however-- denying ANY *REAL* control over the device by the user is absurd. Really, what else do you call having locked bootloaders and other obstructions?

I understand that Google and Pals REAAALY (Pretty please with a cheery on top?) Want to not be obstructed in their collection of user data for marketing purposes. However, last I checked, Android was NOT licensed under terms that mandate that such information be made available to them. As a user, it is, and WILL ALWAYS BE *MY CHOICE* what data I will allow my device to transmit, and what applications will be run, when, and under what credentials.

Not what the app developer "wants" to get, and certainly not what Google and Pals ask for, no matter how many times they say "Pretty please".

Re:Jailbreak vs Rooting

[lophophore]

>> . Some even come with a fuse on the main SOC package that detects if the phone has been rooted.

Really. How about some examples of this? Because it sounds like bullshit to me.

Re:Jailbreak vs Rooting

[quacking duck]

Google gives you (the option) of control, and supplies ample warning before the user chooses to this, it is an option on some phones...even a selling point, mainly used to load none play applications (Android is Eden...with gates).

Basically nothing like each other.

That's for darn sure. Android still doesn't let users override an app's demand for permission to access stuff like GPS, contacts, cell data, photo album, etc.

Sure, you can simply not download an app based on what it says it demands when you try downloading it, but that's beside the point; for all Android's claim to empower the user, why is this of all things not a user option, years after iOS started doing it?

Re:Jailbreak vs Rooting

[fatphil]

The whole sentence is almost certainly bullshit. Not least because fuses don't detect anything. However, almost all ARM-based SoC's come with a bank of e-fuses that can contain write-once data, which theoretically could include security tripwires being triggered.

However, in my experience working for 2 of the largest mobile phone companies in the world, and one of the largest ARM-based SoC vendors in the world, I've never seen anyone do this. It can makes the phones non-repairable - you never want that, you always want the ability to reflash the firmware. Maintenance/returns are expensive.

Re:Jailbreak vs Rooting

[ArbitraryName]

The Galaxy SII and SII I know for sure (because I own and have flashed them) have a hardware flash counter. Every time you flash it, it's incremented. Reinstalling the stock ROM doesn't change that, in fact it just increments it again.

Re:Jailbreak vs Rooting

[thegarbz]

Android is difficult if not impossible to root on many devices. Some even come with a fuse on the main SOC package that detects if the phone has been rooted.

Garbage. Only two devices have shipped with an e-fuse, the Motorola Droid X and the Galaxy Note 3. The DroidX e-fuse prevents running unauthorised system images, the Note 3 simply blows the e-fuse as a warranty indication to show the device has been flashed with unapproved software. Neither prevents rooting.

NONE OF THIS has anything to do with rooting which is a function of a modification of the running system image itself. Flashing custom firmware (something which is trivial on MOST Android phones) happens to be the easiest way to load a custom image. There are however plenty of ways to root phones without flashing any new software and this includes both the Droid X and the N3. Heck even my SGS3 was rooted the day I got it and it didn't even trigger the modification triangle which indicates that the phone is unauthorised and also didn't affect the ability to do OTA updates.

Android phones from Google formally provide instructions on how to root on the website.
Android is difficult to root on a few devices as best I can tell from only Motorola.
Android is impossible to root on no devices that I could find with a quick Google search.
Nearly all Android phones have some method of flashing a completely different firmware (though as said that is not relevant to rooting).

Re:Jailbreak vs Rooting

[fatphil]

Flash counters are not implemented in e-fuses. They would typically be implemented in a calibration area on a flash device which is only writable when the processor is running in secure mode, a mode which is left before the device starts to boot into the main OS. (There can typically be 2-4 levels of bootstrapping loaders before actually booting the OS itself.)

I've flashed Galaxies an uncountable number of times (with a wide range of different kernels and operating systems), you've correctly identified one of the companies I worked for.

I guess this is an Apple thing...!?

[dohzer]

I have no idea what any of this means, but I'll get my mother to translate in the morning.

Re:I guess this is an Apple thing...!?

[Anonymous Coward]

If it helps you at all, the Android terminology for jailbreaking is "rooting and unlocking the bootloader".

I'm not Trolling I'm Rolling

[tuppe666]

Apple treats you as a criminal? I'm sorry but you are simply trolling.

http://www.legalzoom.com/intellectual-property-rights/copyrights/apple-responds-eff-jailbreaking FRom the article because I am lazy.

"Apple has responded to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)'s request to the US Copyright Office to declare hacking a smartphone legal; not surprisingly, Apple believes jailbreaking is copyright violation and, therefore, illegal."

Someone needs there mod points removed :)

Re:I'm not Trolling I'm Rolling

[plover]

The line isn't that simple. iOS already knows when it's been jailbroken. There's even an API for that so that programs that deal with security can refuse to operate if they don't trust the environment. Square Payments won't let you read credit cards on a jailbroken device; AirWatch reports jailbreaking back to corporate servers (I keep an un-jailbroken device around just for reading company email); and even Skype pops up a warning dialog that says "this app is unsupported on a jailbroken device."

Since Apple can detect a jailbroken phone, they could obviously take harsher actions themselves. They could shut the phone down, or make it rapidly eat batteries, or delete your accounts, or do any of a hundred different nasty things to the phone. But they don't. They have arrived at a somewhat unstable cease-fire with the jailbreakers. So Apple, in this weird way, actually has OS level "support" for being jailbroken. They don't treat us as criminals.

And they need to. I own many different iDevices, but I wouldn't have even bought the second if I hadn't been able to jailbreak it. I won't upgrade iOS until there's an untethered jailbreak for it. I seriously never consider buying an iDevice unless I have high confidence that I can jailbreak it the day I buy it. It's all a part of making a deal with the devil: if Apple wants my money, they have to tolerate my jailbreaking their device. And I've heard that somewhere around 30% of iPhones are jailbroken -- that's just way too much money for them to walk away from.

Re:I'm not Trolling I'm Rolling

[jo_ham]

Apple treats you as a criminal? I'm sorry but you are simply trolling.

http://www.legalzoom.com/intellectual-property-rights/copyrights/apple-responds-eff-jailbreaking FRom the article because I am lazy.

"Apple has responded to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)'s request to the US Copyright Office to declare hacking a smartphone legal; not surprisingly, Apple believes jailbreaking is copyright violation and, therefore, illegal."

Someone needs there mod points removed :)

Just so we're clear here, you want to declare taking advantage of a root exploit "legal", but only if it's on an Apple phone.

What about a Linux server? If it's legal to to exploit a root vulnerability on iOS then surely it is on Linux, or Windows, or OS X too, right?

Re:I'm not Trolling I'm Rolling

[twocows]

Don't confuse the issue. The problem is that Apple believes it's illegal to root your own device. The italicized portion is the important part. It is perfectly legal to exploit a root vulnerability on hardware you own. Exploiting software on your own devices is often used in penetration testing, among other things.

Re:I'm not Trolling I'm Rolling

[jo_ham]

You make a good point actually. Although Apple are probably correct that is is illegal to root your own device by the letter of the law. Not that it should be, of course.

Re:I'm not Trolling I'm Rolling

[Nemyst]

They don't treat you as criminals, but they do treat you as pariahs. The fact that having access to all of your phone's features locks you out of certain apps is absolutely ludicrous. I would be up in arms if the same thing happened on my Android phone! How can you even tolerate this sort of thing, let alone actually seem to appreciate them for it? If you've rooted your phone, you've taken up the responsibility of handling its security. The OS and apps on the phone shouldn't detect nor give a shit about it.

Re:I'm not Trolling I'm Rolling

[Anonymous Coward]

I would be up in arms if the same thing happened on my Android phone!

I guess you've never tried to 'rent' or 'buy' a movie on Google Play on a rooted device before (even one of the free ones, like Elf that is currently available). If you had, you'd know that Play Videos just pops up a message that says movies are not supported on a rooted device. The message also contains a link to request a refund for your movie, which they processed (the one time I tried it) in about 24 hours.

Android is certainly no better when it comes to having apps 'trust' the DRM stores of the phone. It's crap either way, but 'both sides' do it.

Re:I'm not Trolling I'm Rolling

[BasilBrush]

I would be up in arms if the same thing happened on my Android phone! How can you even tolerate this sort of thing

And yet you tolerate Android being a den of malware. Each to their own.

Re:I'm not Trolling I'm Rolling

[Anonymous Coward]

Well then, you should be up in arms; various Android apps don't work on rooted devices. Google Wallet, Netflix and Sky Go to name but three.

You're right; Android phones shouldn't detect or give a shit about this.

Re:I'm not Trolling I'm Rolling

[kimvette]

Many tablets are sold with root access from the manufacturer. Are they also affected by this?

Re:I'm not Trolling I'm Rolling

[MildlyTangy]

The moral of the story?

Dont break out of Jail. You were sent to jail for a reason, you should stay there like the criminal you are until your time is up. ( ProTip: Its never up )

Re: I'm not Trolling I'm Rolling

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple developers are not encouraged at all to change the behaviour of their apps based on the detection of jailbreaks, due to the unreliability of detection and poor user experience on false detection. This point is clearly made in a few places in the developer documentation for iOS and OS X. Focus is intended to be on making great software better and focusing on keeping paying customers happy.

Re:I'm not Trolling I'm Rolling

[Anonymous Coward]

You're such an ideologue on this issue (google is ebil) that basically anything you say can be disregarded. If you'd toned it down a touch you'd possibly still be quite credible. Just a tip :)

Re:I'm not Trolling I'm Rolling

[gnasher719]

Don't confuse the issue. The problem is that Apple believes it's illegal to root your own device. The italicized portion is the important part. It is perfectly legal to exploit a root vulnerability on hardware you own. Exploiting software on your own devices is often used in penetration testing, among other things.

Apple doesn't believe that. Apple definitely doesn't _like_ that you can root your own devices, and possibly believes it _should_ be illegal, but doesn't believe it _is_ illegal. Otherwise a jailbroken iPhone would just stop working.

Two things I don't see mentioned: 1. Nobody except Apple or the legitimate ownere can currently read data on a locked + not jailbroken device (except that you can try ten different passcodes for a one in thousand chance to get in) (and Apple needs the phone and a court order to do so, and even then a random ten digit passcode is unbreakable). That changes with a jailbreak. 2. If you worked for the NSA and had a ten million dollar budget to break into many iPhones, how would you do that? Waiting for a jailbreak and making the jailbreakers an offer that they can't or won't refuse seems an excellent plan to me.

The last one seems remarkable to me. There is so much paranoia about Microsoft, Google, Apple co-operating with the NSA, when this is clearly against their business objectives, but nobody thinks that a handful of jailbreakers couldn't be swayed by the choice between a few million dollars and jail time? (Jail time would probably be illegal, but to the paranoid mind definitely a possibility).

$650 and you still don't own it

[lophophore]

Apple makes nice stuff, but I won't touch any more of it. $650 for an unlocked iPhone 5s and you cannot do what you want with it without a "jailbreak". Contrast with a modern Nexus phone that you can install your own software (e.g. Cyanogenmod) on with a PC and a USB cable.

The same is true for Apple's tablets -- in fact, it is even worse, because "jailbreaking" your iPad is a federal crime under the DMCA.

Apple makes nice stuff, no doubt, but if you cannot change what's inside, you really don't own it.

Re:$650 and you still don't own it

[Anonymous Coward]

And the same can be said for 98% of all Android devices on the market today. Thanks for the selective bashing though.

Re:$650 and you still don't own it

[Nemyst]

98%? HTC, Motorola, Sony, Google's own Nexus line and probably more I've forgotten all have official bootloader unlocking toolkits which can be used on their current phones, even the flagships. The Google Play edition phones are also all unlockable. The elephant in the room is Samsung, but one would hope that pressure from the other OEMs might get them to do it too.

Re:$650 and you still don't own it

[Anonymous Coward]

Get over it. The product is not for you. 99.9% of those that even buy modable computers, cellphones, tablets, cars, bookshelves, or aircraft simply don't.

Re:$650 and you still don't own it

[King_TJ]

I understand your decision to buy a Nexus instead of another iPhone. But your logic doesn't make much sense to me?

People spend far more than just $650 all the time on software packages they "don't really own". They don't receive any source code which would allow them to make any changes to what they purchased, nor are they even given more than a limited set of usage rights (can only install on a single PC, etc.).

At the hardware level, you can change whatever you like inside your Apple device, if you're technically capable of doing it. That's no different than any other piece of consumer electronics gear I know of. It will pretty much always void your warranty, but that's a given.

Apple sells you a device that works within the parameters they've outlined; apps come from their App Store, and only apps they approve are listed there. If that's unacceptable to you, you can either jailbreak the device and use it in that "gray area", or use a competitor's product with a different set of design parameters.

Re:$650 and you still don't own it

[Anonymous Coward]

GS2
Galaxy Nexus
GS3
GS4

All of those are rootable/unlocked; they may not be done with official Samsung software, but I'd rather keep my hardware warranty by being able to flash back to stock & get a repair for something out-of-band of rooting rather than the deal with the devil (loss of warranty) you make for the official unlockers.

I'm not ever going to make a warranty claim for software, but the idea that a ROM/root software is able to do anything permanent to the hardware (excluding LED flash and any efuses that the manufacturer builds in) is crazy talk.

Re:$650 and you still don't own it

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple makes stuff that is nice looking, no doubt, but if you cannot change what's inside, you really don't own it.

FTFY... The quality of Apple hardware is a myth. It's just shiny.

Re:$650 and you still don't own it

[lophophore]

Right. I'm using " a competitor's product with a different set of design parameters" and I am much better off for it. Further, I can get at and read the source for Android, and those with the skills can modify it an make new, and different builds of it -- e.g. Cyanogenmod. That's a whole lot more free than Apple's delightful walled garden.

Politics

[wvmarle]

As if reporting about US politics isn't enough, Slashdot is now apparently even reporting political games played within the blackhat/exploit scene. Honestly I have no idea what they're talking about in that summary.

Oh well, at least there is some kind of a link to something technical. And Apple, of course.

And I'll just go back to trying to unlock that uncooperative HTC Evo 3D...

Re:Politics

[MooseMiester]

Slashdot Business Plan for every week where nothing important actually happens (e.g. Most of the time)

On Monday, post Apple Sucks! Microsoft Rocks! Then on Tuesday post Apple Rocks, Microsoft Sucks!

On Wednesday, post Obama Rocks, Republicans Suck. Then on Thursday, post Republicans Rock, Obama Sucks.

On Friday, post something about how the world is going to end for some reason (Man, Climate, Asteroids, Aliens)

There are, after all, two ad units on each page. It would be easier to simply cut and paste the responses from last week, as they generally read the same on stories like this anyway :-)

It's an Apple thing, You wouldn't understand.

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently in the Apple community you should only allow trusted foreign hackers to root your phone and install their apps. In case they pwn your bank account at least you know who to rail against. Who knew.

Saurik Lives!

[vedavis]

Jay Freeman just posted this on Twitter: "I want to make certain a big thank you goes out to @rpetrich, @Surenix, and @kylematthews, without whose help Cydia 1.1.9 would have sucked."

Sure except...

[Anonymous Coward]

...they need physical access and your lock code. It's not just one exploit either, it's a string of them to break through the various protections. It's not as simple as you make it out to be.

Re:Sure except...

[Stalks]

Doesn't matter how simple it is. Once the tool is created its simple for the end-user to break into their phone. Nothing stopping a malicious group creating a similar tool to pwn your phone instead.

Re:Sure except...

[bjohnson]

You DO understand that if your phone is in the physical possession of the bad guy, they can do anything they want?

It's not like this can be done remotely with some crappily cloned Tetris game off the App Store, like some Android exploits we've seen....

Re: Sure except...

[Stalks]

Actually previous jailbreaks were done from simply visiting a web page.

That's funny

[Anonymous Coward]

because the OS is stable? Because it just works for the most part and has a rich app store that's not chock full of crap that will try to steal from me? Because the hardware isn't shit? and on and on!

Sure, there are tweaks that folks who Jailbreak desire but major features? Not so much, the Apple stuff is solid. In the time I've owned just one iPhone I've watched multiple friends go through Android phone after Android phone bitching about various hardware issues. One of them even switched to an Apple phone when the 5 came out and hasn't felt the need to upgrade in over a year whereas before he went through multiple Android phones. I upgrade every few years because I want to and sell off my old phone or use it for a media player in the garage. I watch my friends throw their old Android in the trash, the junk drawer, or in one case go through 3 "replacement" units trying to get a piece of hardware that would fully function for more than a month - they finally bought a new phone. Limited? Maybe a little out of the box but it sure beats the alternative in my book...

Re:That's funny

[tibman]

Saying your friend had an Android is about as useful as saying your friend had a smartphone. Name a brand and a model and readers will actually pay your critique some attention.

Funny...

[Anonymous Coward]

It also locks YOU out of my phone too! I'm okay with the security model. I don't jailbreak the phone I carry because of this.

I do jailbreak the old model I use for other things and I Jailbreak my iPad to tinker with. So far I've yet to download a single pirated app, it's just not of interest to me when apps are so cheap.

Am I reading that correctly?

[gerardrj]

If I follow: the jail-breakers, who want to get out of Apple's walled garden, are complaining that someone is operating outside their own walled garden and allowing software and services the jail-breakers don't approve of to be run on hardware they don't make?

Weak security?!

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh that's pretty rich especially if you espouse Android as the OS alternative here. To Jailbreak an IOS phone requires physical access in nearly every case, a series of steps that often cannot be done remotely, and a string of exploits not just one. Often exploits won't work across all hardware platforms either.

You cannot say the same for Android, not by far. The claim that IOS has "weak security" is just plain wishful thinking and pretty damned amusing really.

Yeah, it's almost like

[Anonymous Coward]

buying anything out of the Android store and hoping it doesn't steal everything after first being forced to press the "grant all" button in order to get the app to run. Yup, what must those poor Apple folks be thinking?! /s

Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't understand why anyone at all interested in hacking hardware or software would waste their time on an Apple device anymore. There are so many Android devices that are much more easy to root and install various roms onto. I've even bought a Chinese tablet that came pre-rooted, making it possible to pretty much do whatever you want.

Re:Send touch events and capture other apps screen

[Anonymous Coward]

On a jailbroken phone anything is possible. It's been rooted.

Reasons to jailbreak ....

[King_TJ]

I have to thank "93 Escort Wagon" for those comments, first of all. That's exactly what I keep trying to explain to people who seem to be under the impression that jailbreaking is simply a tool to allow piracy on the device.

Personally, I do a bit of litecoin mining and I find it immensely frustrating that I can't manage my wallet with an iOS device, thanks to Apple imposing a ban on App Store apps related to crypto-coin exchange.

I also like some of those apps they have for Android phones (such as the one AT&T recently advertised) which automatically read your incoming SMS text messages to you when you're in the car. Again though, iOS doesn't have any because Apple decided any code that interfaces directly with the "cellular side" of the phone is off limits. You can use Siri in a limited way to compose an SMS reply or have one read to you, but it's still a manual process. It doesn't automatically detect you're plugged into a car charger and see you're in motion, so probably driving, and automatically go into that mode.

You already mentioned another thing I'd be interested in having on my phone; a packet sniffer for wifi troubleshooting.

Despite all of this? I still prefer iOS to Android or other options. I've used both types of phones at various times and I keep going back to a personal preference for iOS and support for integration of Apple iOS devices with other devices on the market. (My iPhone is a "superset" of an iPod, after all, which means my iPod aware car stereo can queue up custom playlists of songs from it, etc.)

So yes, a jailbreak gives me the best of both worlds, since Apple has motivation to disallow a few things I want to do on my devices.

Re:Reasons to jailbreak ....

[93 Escort Wagon]

I also like some of those apps they have for Android phones (such as the one AT&T recently advertised) which automatically read your incoming SMS text messages to you when you're in the car. Again though, iOS doesn't have any because Apple decided any code that interfaces directly with the "cellular side" of the phone is off limits.

FYI Siri can do this - reading them hands free works pretty well (although as far as I know you have to prompt her - e.g. "Read my latest text"). Having Siri send messages works acceptably - I don't do that as often.

I don't drive myself to work very often anymore, but yeah - that's useful functionality.

re: pariahs?

[King_TJ]

How is this Apple's fault though? Skype isn't owned by Apple. Square payment systems don't have ties back to Apple.

If all Apple does is provide an API that can be queried to see if the device is jailbroken, I'd say they're pretty much a neutral party.

People should get angry with the developers who opt to use it to prevent you from using their software, if they have a problem with it.

Incorrect information

[Brawlking]

This information is incorrect, I installed the jailbreak and got the regular Cydia store. The TaiG store is only for people located in China.

Sounds legit

[PapayaSF]

Actually, if you've ever bought a iPhone in certain Asian countries - such as MKB in Bangkok, the phones from small dealers are sold pre-jailbroken and loaded up with pirated Apps, movies and other content, as a "service" to the customer.

And I'm sure all those dealers carefully screened that pre-loaded content for malware, right? Depending on how cynical one is about Apple, this sort of thing is either the #1 or #2 reason they are so tight-assed about the App Store and about jailbreaking.

1st generation iPod Touch ?s for jailbreaking...

[antdude]

Hi.

I hope assume iPod Touch would fit in this discussion. Anyways and recently (a couple days ago), I got an unwanted old/used (resetted and formatted that took about two/2 hours), iPod Touch (v3.1.3 (7E18), model MA627LL from 2008, and 16 GB). Newbie questions:

1. Is there a way to make it as an external USB flash drive (all file systems [FAT32, NTFS, MacFS, EXT#, etc. supported) beside the usual iTunes stuff? I know I did it before with regular iPods, like a 6th generation Nano, through iTunes' for disk option to have both. I even formatted to make more free disk space for storage and then let iTunes (Windows XP Pro. SP3 and Mac OS X 10.5.8) put back its data to it when done. It seems iOS devices doesn't allow this disk storage option? I cannot even format its storage from Windows Explorer and Linux/Debian stable's KDE v4.8.4. Or is there a freeware third party software/OS replacement to do it?

2. Is there a way to only show old supported iOS versions in App Store? I noticed many free Apps were unsupported for it according to its App Store (why is it asking for a credit card when I only wanted free ones? -- there is none option anymore according to Apple forums). Is there a way to filter to show only the supported ones for this old iPod Touch's iOS version? I couldn't find a way to do it in both iTunes (Windows XP Pro. SP3) and iPod Touch.

3. I read and heard about jailbreaking. What will I be able to do with it over what Apple gives me? Will I have plenty of options in terms of flexibilities on this over five years old device?

Thank you in advance. :)

Re: pariahs?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, there's a counter to those apps too, just look around.

Exactly

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple is merely protecting its brand, as you say. The Apple brand is everything!

is it my property?

[Anonymous Coward]

That is the distillation of this issue: do you own your phone or does Apple own it after you "buy" it?

the lock

[Anonymous Coward]

Lumpy is referring to the fact that whoever creates the jailbreak can quite easily install other backdoors/malware into your device, since they have root access after all.

iOS on non-Apple hardware

[Anonymous Coward]

If somebody found some what of doing this I would be very grateful. Of course I realize that this may be impossible. But it solves the current dillema I face:

- iOS gives a much, much better user experience than Android because it focusses all it's reasources on the user when she is interfacing with the device, doesn't try to be too smart and again, focusses all resource on user interaction during that time. Humans should NEVER have to wait for machines, for input never more than 100ms. Machines should wait for humans.
- Hardware that runs Android gives a much, much better user experience because it has bigger screen, weighs less, has standard connectors, has replaceable battery, has more features.

I jailbeak idevices AND pay developers

[Anonymous Coward]

Saurik (mentioned in article) maintains an excellent repository and App Store for iOS.
  They're opposed to and don't host the repos linked to cracked software
They're not the only ones in this community who feel the same.

I've purchased many apps here over the past 5yrs which were not allowed or removed from apple's offical App Store -
Jailbreaking isn't about stealing or doing anything immoral for that matter

Seems the discussion went off on a tangent related to pirating software
If a person doesn't own a jailbroken iDevice - it's iikely they'd know about the alt_appStore I'm referring to.