The SQL code may be MSSQL specific, but there's nothing stopping anyone from making a MySQL version of it. And it has absolutely nothing to do with IIS. Even Apache running on top of MSSQL would be vulnerable.
So, according to you, forcing Apple has to modify their website to promote Microsoft products is not OK, but forcing Apple to modify their smartphone to promote Google products is OK? This makes no sense to me.
WTH is this nonsense? First of all it's the user's smartphone, not Apple's. And Google's products are not being promoted here, just a third party ad is being shown in a developer's app. No mention of Google anywhere to the end user.
an advertising service provider owned by or affiliated with a developer or distributor of mobile devices, mobile operating systems or development environments other than Apple would not qualify as independent
That's the money quote right there. They are trying to hurt their competitors. Why single out developers or distributors of mobile devices, mobile operating systems or development environments? How does that help the user at all?
The problem is that the Apple storefront is the only store for the iPhone and iPad. Thus your analogies break down. If there was any legal way of installing 3rd party apps, then iDevice users would have a choice like in your examples.
And then there's the competitive aspect. Why should Apple allow Google to use their platform to collect information that will allow them to improve the integration of advertising into a competing platform, Android? Sure, this move may be in part aimed at getting back at Google for the AdMob purchase, but there's a good case to me made that the primary motivation is to provide as little research and development assistance as possible to a competing platform (note that the limitation on analytics is for any phone or mobile OS manufacturer).
Wow. That sure sounds like an example of 'An eye for an eye and soon the world will turn blind'. 'Helping' is different from actively blocking.
Why should Google help Apple by developing Youtube for iPhone? Why should Google help Apple by making a very nice Google Maps for iPhone at launch(can't imagine they make a lot of money off that)?
How will Google retaliate? Ban HD video streaming from Youtube to iDevices? Apple is acting like the bad kid on the block and soon the other kids may take their toys and go home.
It may be your iPhone, but it is still Apple's AppStore and services you use It's a bit like a local radio station or listener demanding their station to be available on satellite radio because it is the radio owner's stereo, not the satellite radio company's.
Eh, not in this case. You forgot the all important developer of the App,thus your analogy fails. The developer is left with less freedom to choose ad services and that would affect their bottomline. Hence they would make Apps paid(hurting the iDevice customer) or not develop the App(customer gets less choice again). This is directly hurting the customer who would rather see Ads than pay for the App. Apple is specifically targeting Google by banning companies that have a mobile operating system from showing ads based on analytics.
Even if your argument were factually correct, which it is not, exercising a modicum of common sense would explain that it is AT&T who gain from exclusivity, not Apple
Err, if my post was factually correct(which it is), then Apple is gaining financially big time on every iPhone user.
To suggest that Apple were the ones who demanded exclusivity is laughable, and that they did so out of greed, is simply irrational. Why the hell would they willingly restrict their own potential sales? You sound like just another anti-Apple jihadist, willing to distort facts in any way you can to demonstrate that Apple is "evil".
Who suggested that Apple demanded exclusivity? All they demanded and demand is dollars. Why did they renew the agreement again? Because if they added Verizon to the supported network list, they would lose the money fleeced from every iPhone user. This just shows that all they care about is dollars and not customers who have to put up with shitty service.
And you sound like a blind dumb fanboy who can't see past his nose.
Excellent point, and as a corollary to that it's worth noting that the plethora of Android devices are available on all of the Big Four networks, while iPhone continues to be available only on AT&T. It says something about the popularity of the iPhone that it's available only on arguably the worst of the major networks yet is stll No. 2 behind only Blackberry.
Much has been made of the fact that the Android platform outsold the iPhone in the 1st Quarter, but the Apple-haters crowing that this somehow signals the ascendancy of Android and the end for the iPhone's supremacy are bound to be bitterly disappointed when the iPhone becomes available on othe networks. Not "if", "when". The general consensus is that it will be available on Verizon sometime in 2011, and according to Shaw Wu of Kaufman Bros., it may be on T-Mobile as early as fall of this year. In my opinion, the rapid sales of Android devices have as much to do with Verizon's aggressive promotion, as well as the reluctance of people to switch from their existing providers to AT&T, as the merits of the platform itself. That calculus will change dramatically when the iPhone throws off the AT&T shackles. Android outselling iPhone in the 1st Quarter of 2010 may well come to be looked on as an anomaly
Apple gets a big kickback from AT&T on the monthly bill that iPhone users pay. That's the real reason for exclusivity despite the shitty AT&T network. The lack of choice is purely due to Apple's greed. No wonder they're making money head over heels while many iPhone suffer with poor voice coverage and clamber for choice. However, you will find that many Apple lovers love to ignore this fact or are ignorant of it.
So Google gets into smartphones, browsers and operating systems, and then cries "Foul!" when Apple gets into online advertising? (OK, I know Apple's hardware restrictions are a valid issue, but still....)
Google is crying foul not because Apple got into advertising, but because Apple banned companies owned by makers of other mobile operating systems from using analytics(critical for ads) on the iDevices. i.e Apple is specifically targeting Google just like it targeted Adobe last time around
It was used in British and American English as early as last century.
From the Wiki:
"Do the needful" is an expression, now archaic or used humorously except in South Asian English (Pakistani, Indian and Sri Lankan), which means "do that which is requisite or necessary". Although sometimes parodied as a staple of contemporary South Asian English, the expression was current in both British[1] and American English[2] well into the early 20th century.
The Oxford English Dictionary lists examples of usage from 1709 (Richard Steele in the Tatler), 1771 (Samuel Foote in Maid of Bath), 1821 (Maria Edgeworth in a letter), 1831 (Walter Scott in his journal), 1929 (I. Colvin in his Life of Dyer), and 1992 (Jeff Torrington in Swing Hammer Swing!), the last likely used humorously.[1]
Win7 looks to me like an OK OS, though I have not tried anything that could have problems with the included DRM, but for now it looks OK. Not good enough for me to format any of my PCs and reinstall Windows though.
What didn't you try that could have problems with what included DRM?
First Apple turns patent troll on HTC, now it's MSFT's turn? I thought these two were kinda well behaved and used patents only as a defensive measure, guess I was wrong.
Uh little guy? Apple? Have you been looking at their revenues, profit and market capitalization recently? If anything, non-Apple smartphones are the little guys in the smartphone and App market.
Sites like Sourceforge hosts downloads for free and you think Apple can't pay for hosting free apps???
Additional bandwidth and storage is dirt cheap these days. Are you living in the early nineties?
There are a lot of sites that use a lot of bandwidth that just run by meager advertising sales alone and you mean to say Apple can't use some of their billions in profits and operating cash to provide those for free for the developers who don't make money off the Apps?
Cmon. Apple has benefited enough from Free software (BSD, Webkit, GCC, etc. etc.) In fact they have made tens of billions off them.
There are hosting plans available for TBs of data for a few bucks a month.
I really don't see the point of your posts, other than to publicly parade your ignorance.
If an Android developer does not like the Android Market he can use another.
An example of a free App market --> http://slideme.org/ If a author doesn't like a publishing house he can shop for another, even if all are Draconian, there is nothing to prevent someone starting a new one offering better terms for authors.
But, can you point to another App Store for the iPhone? And no, Cydia doesn't count, because Apple believes jailbreaking is criminal and has DRM'ed the iPhone to hell with TPMs to prevent other channels of distribution. I know you won't believe me, so please read http://www.copyright.gov/1201/2008/responses/apple-inc-31.pdf before calling me out on this.
It's just sad how many people make up and believe false rationalizations because of something almost like Stockholm Syndrome when it comes to Apple.
If devices like iPad are the future of computing, then I guess we can kiss a lot of languages goodbye unless they come from Cupertino and are blessed by Jobs, since even developers don't like jailbreaking(it's illegal according to Apple).
Ah, a slippery slope argument. The fact is that Apple does NOT have a monopoly of the market, and people who want to develop in some other language has got plenty of choices to do so. And there's not even the merest hint of a suggestion that Apple is going to be the monopoly vendor of computing devices.
What about this scary scenario, Both Apple and MS hold ~50% of the market(mobile or otherwise), and hence are not a monopoly and can trample on developer's rights. Don't tell me that's unlikely, just look at Windows Phone 7 Series.
The iPhone is (one of?) the first general computing devices to ban other languages, and others are learning from their success.
Also, you don't need Apple to be a monopoly, just a big player is enough to affect software development.
Surely they are more than a merest hint of a suggestion?
You can write shitty apps in ObjC and people do it all the time. The App store is chock full of shitty apps like Fart apps.
There are a lot of shitty apps, and a lot of excellent apps. As I said, if Flash and their ilk were allowed there would be MORE shitty apps. It's a favour to consumers to keep the signal to noise ratio on the App Store as high as possible, and not allowing Flash apps helps that ratio.
So, lets kill a ton of good Flash Apps and content on the Web just because there will be some more shitty apps to sift and search through? And here I thought storage, bandwidth and power of servers on the internet was dirt cheap for a company wallowing in cash like Apple.
And Apple is doing that out of the good of their heart for free app developers who should be forever indebted to Apple for not charging for their free apps.
Not.
They do that so that the iPhone becomes attractive to users(because of free apps available) so that the users can be charged as per my #1, #2 and #3 in my post above.
So does Apple help them in any way monetarily for making their devices more attractive? No! They just fleece them too, leading to #4 to be added to my post above:
4) Take $99 from every iPhone developer that submits to Apps store (even those who develop and distribute Apps for free, thus making the iDevices more attractive).
Secunia Advisory SA39670 Apple Safari Information Disclosure and Code ExecutionSecunia Advisory SA39670 Get alerted and manage the vulnerability life cycle Free Trial
Release Date 2010-05-07 Last Update 2010-05-11
Popularity 7,905 views Comments 0 comments
Criticality level Highly critical Impact Exposure of sensitive information System access Where From remote Authentication level Available in Customer Area
Report reliability Available in Customer Area Solution Status Unpatched
Systems affected Available in Customer Area Approve distribution Available in Customer Area
Software: Apple Safari 4.x
Secunia CVSS Score Available in Customer Area CVE Reference(s) No CVE references.
Description A vulnerability and a security issue have been discovered in Apple Safari, which may lead to exposure of sensitive information or can be exploited by malicious people to compromise a user's system.
1) A use-after-free error when handling pop-up boxes created from a child window can be exploited to execute arbitrary code when a user visits a specially crafted web page.
2) Safari includes HTTP basic authentication credentials in an HTTP request if a web page that requires HTTP basic authentication redirects to a different domain (e.g. via a "Location" header).
The vulnerability and the security issue are confirmed in version 4.0.5 for Windows. Other versions may also be affected.
Solution Disable JavaScript (e.g. via the "Security" tab in the Safari preferences dialog). Do not authenticate to sites that use HTTP basic authentication and use redirections to different domains.
make sure they get paid for every app their stupid devices can run.
Explain the fact that Apple will be happy to host and serve your free app on their store and how it fits into your logic bomb here.
Only if it's not political, or deemed offensive. Not even if you're a Pulitzer prize winner (notice how they capitulated AFTER the shitstorm,so if you were a ordinary cartoonist, you're fucked)..
The fact that you can't CHOOSE to install Flash and you can't CHOOSE to use another, more powerful browser, on the other hand - that I care about. THAT'S an asshole, anti-competitive move. Apple deserves to be smacked down for that.
You can choose. It takes effort but they can't and won't stop you from jailbreaking and installing any app you want. They will stop supporting you however, which is perfectly acceptable.
Wrong. They consider it highly illegal. Maybe you were too busy fawning over your iDevices when the news hit the net?
THis is Apple's response to EFF's request for an exemption for jailbreaking to the Copyright office:
Current jailbreak techniques now in widespread use utilize unauthorized modifications to the copyrighted bootloader and OS, resulting in infringement of the copyrights in those programs. For example, the current most popular jailbreaking software for the iPhone, PwnageTool (cited by EFF in its submission), causes a modified bootloader and OS to be installed in the iPhone, resulting in infringement of Apple’s reproduction and derivative works rights. Specifically, in the spring of 2008, hackers were able to determine how to circumvent the secure ROM in the iPhone and falsely sign the bootloader. Using such knowledge, a falsely signed modified version of Apple’s bootloader was created that will fool the secure ROM into loading it, thereby circumventing the TPM implemented by the secure ROM. PwnageTool directly modifies a copy of the bootloader and loads it onto the iPhone. The modified bootloader is configured so that it does not perform the authentication check of the OS, and it therefore loads a modified version of Apple’s OS that is not signed, thereby circumventing the TPM implemented by the bootloader. The modified OS, in turn, is configured so that it does not perform authentication checks on application programs loaded onto the iPhone, thereby jailbreaking the device. In sum, PwnageTool circumvents every link of Apple’s “chain of trust” TPMs in the iPhone. More generally, as the EFF submission admits, “decryption and modification of the iPhone firmware appears to be necessary for any jailbreak technique to succeed on a persistent basis.”32 Jailbreaking therefore involves infringing uses of the bootloader and OS, the copyrighted works that are protected by the TPMs being circumvented. Unauthorized derivative versions of the bootloader and OS have been created. Copies of those infringing works have been stored on web sites, and infringing reproductions of those works are created each time they are downloaded through Pwnage Tool and loaded onto the iPhone.33 In addition, as discussed in Section II.B.2 above, the jailbroken OS enables pirated copies of Apple copyrighted content and other third party content such as games and applications to play on the iPhone, resulting in further infringing uses of copyrighted works and diminished incentive to create those works in the first place. In sum, the jailbreaking of the iPhone that would be permitted by the proposed Class #1 exemption in 5A and
Cost of gaming consoles are subsidized by sales of games. Can you say that for the iPad?
The iPhone/iPod touch is considered to be and used as a portable personal computer. The iPad is being hailed by many as the future of computing(read any number of articles) and for some might be the only "computer" at home. The examples you mentioned are not considered that way. What Apple doing is scary because the freedom that users and developers are used to is under a big threat. The others are learning from Apple's example of success and locking down things (see Windows Mobile vs. Windows Phone 7).
And people do complain even about Wii, PS3, XBox beign locked down. Also,
Don't forget the long diatribes, arguments and rationalizations about how Intel processors suck and how PowerPC processor were all the shiznit... up until Apple switched to Intel. Then we heard about how IBM sucks and how Intel was the shiznit. IBM had suddenly become the bad ex...
Apple software is full of holes too. One small example:
CoreAudio (CVE-2010-0036) -- A buffer overflow exists in the handling of mp4 audio files. Playing a maliciously crafted mp4 audio file may lead to an unexpected application termination or arbitrary code execution.
So a AAC file can pwn a Mac and delete all the files and your files are... screwed?
Slashdot Mirror
The SQL code may be MSSQL specific, but there's nothing stopping anyone from making a MySQL version of it. And it has absolutely nothing to do with IIS. Even Apache running on top of MSSQL would be vulnerable.
And MySQL doesnt' seem to be reliably safer. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=opera&hs=u5U&rls=en&q=mysql+sql+injection&revid=634420364&sa=X&ei=mowSTNjUJoT7lweXo-32Bw&ved=0CF8Q1QIoAw
One has to balance the featureset as well before relying on PHP and MySQL.
Does Toyota ban putting Ford stickers on back of the trucks it sells?
So, according to you, forcing Apple has to modify their website to promote Microsoft products is not OK, but forcing Apple to modify their smartphone to promote Google products is OK? This makes no sense to me.
WTH is this nonsense? First of all it's the user's smartphone, not Apple's. And Google's products are not being promoted here, just a third party ad is being shown in a developer's app. No mention of Google anywhere to the end user.
an advertising service provider owned by or affiliated with a developer or distributor of mobile devices, mobile operating systems or development environments other than Apple would not qualify as independent
That's the money quote right there. They are trying to hurt their competitors. Why single out developers or distributors of mobile devices, mobile operating systems or development environments? How does that help the user at all?
It's worse than that. Ford would be collecting 30% of the revenue and will have to approve the Toyota GPS before you can buy it.
The problem is that the Apple storefront is the only store for the iPhone and iPad. Thus your analogies break down. If there was any legal way of installing 3rd party apps, then iDevice users would have a choice like in your examples.
And then there's the competitive aspect. Why should Apple allow Google to use their platform to collect information that will allow them to improve the integration of advertising into a competing platform, Android? Sure, this move may be in part aimed at getting back at Google for the AdMob purchase, but there's a good case to me made that the primary motivation is to provide as little research and development assistance as possible to a competing platform (note that the limitation on analytics is for any phone or mobile OS manufacturer).
Wow. That sure sounds like an example of 'An eye for an eye and soon the world will turn blind'. 'Helping' is different from actively blocking.
Why should Google help Apple by developing Youtube for iPhone? Why should Google help Apple by making a very nice Google Maps for iPhone at launch(can't imagine they make a lot of money off that)?
How will Google retaliate? Ban HD video streaming from Youtube to iDevices? Apple is acting like the bad kid on the block and soon the other kids may take their toys and go home.
It may be your iPhone, but it is still Apple's AppStore and services you use It's a bit like a local radio station or listener demanding their station to be available on satellite radio because it is the radio owner's stereo, not the satellite radio company's.
Eh, not in this case. You forgot the all important developer of the App,thus your analogy fails. The developer is left with less freedom to choose ad services and that would affect their bottomline. Hence they would make Apps paid(hurting the iDevice customer) or not develop the App(customer gets less choice again). This is directly hurting the customer who would rather see Ads than pay for the App. Apple is specifically targeting Google by banning companies that have a mobile operating system from showing ads based on analytics.
I am sorry, but Apple does receive a kickback from AT&T.
One small link(there are lots of others)
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-9803657-37.html
Even if your argument were factually correct, which it is not, exercising a modicum of common sense would explain that it is AT&T who gain from exclusivity, not Apple
Err, if my post was factually correct(which it is), then Apple is gaining financially big time on every iPhone user.
To suggest that Apple were the ones who demanded exclusivity is laughable, and that they did so out of greed, is simply irrational. Why the hell would they willingly restrict their own potential sales? You sound like just another anti-Apple jihadist, willing to distort facts in any way you can to demonstrate that Apple is "evil".
Who suggested that Apple demanded exclusivity? All they demanded and demand is dollars. Why did they renew the agreement again? Because if they added Verizon to the supported network list, they would lose the money fleeced from every iPhone user. This just shows that all they care about is dollars and not customers who have to put up with shitty service.
And you sound like a blind dumb fanboy who can't see past his nose.
Excellent point, and as a corollary to that it's worth noting that the plethora of Android devices are available on all of the Big Four networks, while iPhone continues to be available only on AT&T. It says something about the popularity of the iPhone that it's available only on arguably the worst of the major networks yet is stll No. 2 behind only Blackberry.
Much has been made of the fact that the Android platform outsold the iPhone in the 1st Quarter, but the Apple-haters crowing that this somehow signals the ascendancy of Android and the end for the iPhone's supremacy are bound to be bitterly disappointed when the iPhone becomes available on othe networks. Not "if", "when". The general consensus is that it will be available on Verizon sometime in 2011, and according to Shaw Wu of Kaufman Bros., it may be on T-Mobile as early as fall of this year. In my opinion, the rapid sales of Android devices have as much to do with Verizon's aggressive promotion, as well as the reluctance of people to switch from their existing providers to AT&T, as the merits of the platform itself. That calculus will change dramatically when the iPhone throws off the AT&T shackles. Android outselling iPhone in the 1st Quarter of 2010 may well come to be looked on as an anomaly
Apple gets a big kickback from AT&T on the monthly bill that iPhone users pay. That's the real reason for exclusivity despite the shitty AT&T network. The lack of choice is purely due to Apple's greed. No wonder they're making money head over heels while many iPhone suffer with poor voice coverage and clamber for choice. However, you will find that many Apple lovers love to ignore this fact or are ignorant of it.
So Google gets into smartphones, browsers and operating systems, and then cries "Foul!" when Apple gets into online advertising? (OK, I know Apple's hardware restrictions are a valid issue, but still....)
Google is crying foul not because Apple got into advertising, but because Apple banned companies owned by makers of other mobile operating systems from using analytics(critical for ads) on the iDevices. i.e Apple is specifically targeting Google just like it targeted Adobe last time around
It was used in British and American English as early as last century.
From the Wiki:
"Do the needful" is an expression, now archaic or used humorously except in South Asian English (Pakistani, Indian and Sri Lankan), which means "do that which is requisite or necessary". Although sometimes parodied as a staple of contemporary South Asian English, the expression was current in both British[1] and American English[2] well into the early 20th century.
The Oxford English Dictionary lists examples of usage from 1709 (Richard Steele in the Tatler), 1771 (Samuel Foote in Maid of Bath), 1821 (Maria Edgeworth in a letter), 1831 (Walter Scott in his journal), 1929 (I. Colvin in his Life of Dyer), and 1992 (Jeff Torrington in Swing Hammer Swing!), the last likely used humorously.[1]
Win7 looks to me like an OK OS, though I have not tried anything that could have problems with the included DRM, but for now it looks OK. Not good enough for me to format any of my PCs and reinstall Windows though.
What didn't you try that could have problems with what included DRM?
So you mean you first need to benchmark the benchmarking software with software that benchmarks benchmarking software? And so on?
First Apple turns patent troll on HTC, now it's MSFT's turn? I thought these two were kinda well behaved and used patents only as a defensive measure, guess I was wrong.
Uh little guy? Apple? Have you been looking at their revenues, profit and market capitalization recently? If anything, non-Apple smartphones are the little guys in the smartphone and App market.
Sites like Sourceforge hosts downloads for free and you think Apple can't pay for hosting free apps???
Additional bandwidth and storage is dirt cheap these days. Are you living in the early nineties?
There are a lot of sites that use a lot of bandwidth that just run by meager advertising sales alone and you mean to say Apple can't use some of their billions in profits and operating cash to provide those for free for the developers who don't make money off the Apps?
Cmon. Apple has benefited enough from Free software (BSD, Webkit, GCC, etc. etc.) In fact they have made tens of billions off them.
There are hosting plans available for TBs of data for a few bucks a month.
I really don't see the point of your posts, other than to publicly parade your ignorance.
Erm....isn't that what you just did?
Android market is not the only venue to sell/buy/download Android apps.
Just look at the list here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_digital_distribution_platforms_for_mobile_devices#Third-party_platforms
If an Android developer does not like the Android Market he can use another.
An example of a free App market --> http://slideme.org/
If a author doesn't like a publishing house he can shop for another, even if all are Draconian, there is nothing to prevent someone starting a new one offering better terms for authors.
But, can you point to another App Store for the iPhone? And no, Cydia doesn't count, because Apple believes jailbreaking is criminal and has DRM'ed the iPhone to hell with TPMs to prevent other channels of distribution. I know you won't believe me, so please read http://www.copyright.gov/1201/2008/responses/apple-inc-31.pdf before calling me out on this.
It's just sad how many people make up and believe false rationalizations because of something almost like Stockholm Syndrome when it comes to Apple.
Ah, a slippery slope argument. The fact is that Apple does NOT have a monopoly of the market, and people who want to develop in some other language has got plenty of choices to do so. And there's not even the merest hint of a suggestion that Apple is going to be the monopoly vendor of computing devices.
What about this scary scenario, Both Apple and MS hold ~50% of the market(mobile or otherwise), and hence are not a monopoly and can trample on developer's rights. Don't tell me that's unlikely, just look at Windows Phone 7 Series.
The iPhone is (one of?) the first general computing devices to ban other languages, and others are learning from their success.
Also, you don't need Apple to be a monopoly, just a big player is enough to affect software development.
What about articles such as:
http://gizmodo.com/5506692/ipad-is-the-future
http://techcrunch.com/2010/01/27/ipad/
http://speirs.org/blog/2010/1/29/future-shock.html
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9175600/The_iPad_is_the_future_for_home_computing
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2010/04/02/ipad-the-destroyer-19-things-it-will-kill/
Surely they are more than a merest hint of a suggestion?
There are a lot of shitty apps, and a lot of excellent apps. As I said, if Flash and their ilk were allowed there would be MORE shitty apps. It's a favour to consumers to keep the signal to noise ratio on the App Store as high as possible, and not allowing Flash apps helps that ratio.
So, lets kill a ton of good Flash Apps and content on the Web just because there will be some more shitty apps to sift and search through? And here I thought storage, bandwidth and power of servers on the internet was dirt cheap for a company wallowing in cash like Apple.
And Apple is doing that out of the good of their heart for free app developers who should be forever indebted to Apple for not charging for their free apps.
Not.
They do that so that the iPhone becomes attractive to users(because of free apps available) so that the users can be charged as per my #1, #2 and #3 in my post above.
So does Apple help them in any way monetarily for making their devices more attractive? No! They just fleece them too, leading to #4 to be added to my post above:
4) Take $99 from every iPhone developer that submits to Apps store (even those who develop and distribute Apps for free, thus making the iDevices more attractive).
Lets ban Safari, it's vulnerable right now:
http://secunia.com/advisories/39670
Secunia Advisory SA39670
Apple Safari Information Disclosure and Code ExecutionSecunia Advisory SA39670
Get alerted and manage the vulnerability life cycle
Free Trial
Release Date 2010-05-07
Last Update 2010-05-11
Popularity 7,905 views
Comments 0 comments
Criticality level Highly critical
Impact Exposure of sensitive information
System access
Where From remote
Authentication level Available in Customer Area
Report reliability Available in Customer Area
Solution Status Unpatched
Systems affected Available in Customer Area
Approve distribution Available in Customer Area
Software: Apple Safari 4.x
Secunia CVSS Score Available in Customer Area
CVE Reference(s) No CVE references.
Description
A vulnerability and a security issue have been discovered in Apple Safari, which may lead to exposure of sensitive information or can be exploited by malicious people to compromise a user's system.
1) A use-after-free error when handling pop-up boxes created from a child window can be exploited to execute arbitrary code when a user visits a specially crafted web page.
2) Safari includes HTTP basic authentication credentials in an HTTP request if a web page that requires HTTP basic authentication redirects to a different domain (e.g. via a "Location" header).
The vulnerability and the security issue are confirmed in version 4.0.5 for Windows. Other versions may also be affected.
Solution
Disable JavaScript (e.g. via the "Security" tab in the Safari preferences dialog). Do not authenticate to sites that use HTTP basic authentication and use redirections to different domains.
Provided and/or discovered by
1) Krystian Kloskowski (h07)
2) Vin Lisciandro
Changelog
Further details available in Customer Area
Original Advisory
1) http://h07.w.interia.pl/Safari.rar
Other references
Further details available in Customer Area
Technical Analysis
Further details available in Customer Area
Deep Links
Links available in Customer Area
Explain the fact that Apple will be happy to host and serve your free app on their store and how it fits into your logic bomb here.
Only if it's not political, or deemed offensive. Not even if you're a Pulitzer prize winner (notice how they capitulated AFTER the shitstorm,so if you were a ordinary cartoonist, you're fucked)..
See the iPhone app graveyard(now outdated but some gems here) : http://boredzo.org/killed-iphone-apps/
You can choose. It takes effort but they can't and won't stop you from jailbreaking and installing any app you want. They will stop supporting you however, which is perfectly acceptable.
Wrong. They consider it highly illegal. Maybe you were too busy fawning over your iDevices when the news hit the net?
THis is Apple's response to EFF's request for an exemption for jailbreaking to the Copyright office:
http://www.copyright.gov/1201/2008/responses/apple-inc-31.pdf
Some excerpts:
Current jailbreak techniques now in widespread use utilize unauthorized modifications to
the copyrighted bootloader and OS, resulting in infringement of the copyrights in those
programs. For example, the current most popular jailbreaking software for the iPhone,
PwnageTool (cited by EFF in its submission), causes a modified bootloader and OS to be
installed in the iPhone, resulting in infringement of Apple’s reproduction and derivative works
rights. Specifically, in the spring of 2008, hackers were able to determine how to circumvent the
secure ROM in the iPhone and falsely sign the bootloader. Using such knowledge, a falsely
signed modified version of Apple’s bootloader was created that will fool the secure ROM into
loading it, thereby circumventing the TPM implemented by the secure ROM. PwnageTool
directly modifies a copy of the bootloader and loads it onto the iPhone. The modified bootloader
is configured so that it does not perform the authentication check of the OS, and it therefore
loads a modified version of Apple’s OS that is not signed, thereby circumventing the TPM
implemented by the bootloader. The modified OS, in turn, is configured so that it does not
perform authentication checks on application programs loaded onto the iPhone, thereby
jailbreaking the device. In sum, PwnageTool circumvents every link of Apple’s “chain of trust”
TPMs in the iPhone. More generally, as the EFF submission admits, “decryption and
modification of the iPhone firmware appears to be necessary for any jailbreak technique to
succeed on a persistent basis.”32
Jailbreaking therefore involves infringing uses of the bootloader and OS, the copyrighted
works that are protected by the TPMs being circumvented. Unauthorized derivative versions of
the bootloader and OS have been created. Copies of those infringing works have been stored on
web sites, and infringing reproductions of those works are created each time they are
downloaded through Pwnage Tool and loaded onto the iPhone.33 In addition, as discussed in
Section II.B.2 above, the jailbroken OS enables pirated copies of Apple copyrighted content and
other third party content such as games and applications to play on the iPhone, resulting in
further infringing uses of copyrighted works and diminished incentive to create those works in
the first place.
In sum, the jailbreaking of the iPhone that would be permitted by the proposed Class #1
exemption in 5A and
Cost of gaming consoles are subsidized by sales of games. Can you say that for the iPad?
The iPhone/iPod touch is considered to be and used as a portable personal computer. The iPad is being hailed by many as the future of computing(read any number of articles) and for some might be the only "computer" at home. The examples you mentioned are not considered that way. What Apple doing is scary because the freedom that users and developers are used to is under a big threat. The others are learning from Apple's example of success and locking down things (see Windows Mobile vs. Windows Phone 7).
And people do complain even about Wii, PS3, XBox beign locked down. Also,
Don't forget the long diatribes, arguments and rationalizations about how Intel processors suck and how PowerPC processor were all the shiznit... up until Apple switched to Intel. Then we heard about how IBM sucks and how Intel was the shiznit. IBM had suddenly become the bad ex...
Apple software is full of holes too. One small example:
CoreAudio (CVE-2010-0036) -- A buffer overflow exists in the handling of mp4 audio files. Playing a maliciously crafted mp4 audio file may lead to an unexpected application termination or arbitrary code execution.
So a AAC file can pwn a Mac and delete all the files and your files are... screwed?