Hackers release browser-based 'jailbreak' for iPhone 4



  • Reply 141 of 178
    Originally Posted by geekdad View Post

    Really? I returned my IP4 for signal issues and proximity issues and dropped calls. I was told to use a bumper to get a fully functional phone.

    I switched to the HTC EVO and I have not found one app I used on my IP that was not in the Android Market Place. NOT ONE.........Thye might be called something different but they still do the same functions with the same ammount of ease.

    Facetime? Got it on the Android market place called Fring and it free......and it is awesome.......

    Well, first if you just download a few apps from Apple App Store, it's possible you could find something similar in Android marketplace.

    That said... I'll make an attempt, my 3 and 5 year old kids LOVE these two apps from App Store, "Teach Me: Toddler" and "Teach Me: Kindergarten". They are available for $0.99 each. I figure the amount of education they are getting, learning first the alphabet, shapes, colors, numbers, and then words, phonics, addition and subtraction, are probably worth at least half as much as the $2,000 a month I'm paying for their Pre-K.

    My 5 year old is now able to reach simple storybooks and read chinese fortune cookies wise saying, and do simple addition and subtraction as a result of these two programs. Please find them in the Android Market Place, or at least similar quality apps.

    Oh... Another one, but that's really more for the iPad.... "Toy Stories".

    Of course, if all you need is porn, and that's what drove you to EVO..... all the best to you.....
  • Reply 142 of 178
    shadashshadash Posts: 470member
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

    Who cares about whether you think it's fair or not?

    AT&T gives you a contract. You agree to the contract. The contract does not allow tethering.

    You have 2 choices:

    1. Choose a different carrier (and phone).

    2. Obtain an iPhone with AT&T contract under false pretenses and violate the contract.

    Sorry, but #2 is completely unethical and tantamount to theft. You're taking a service you didn't pay for.

    Using your 2 GB a month as you want is not theft. You paid for them. AT&T's anti-consumer behavior on this encourages jailbreaking.

    However, I do agree that it is wrong to steal apps on Cydia that you should be paying for on the App Store.
  • Reply 143 of 178
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Originally Posted by shadash View Post

    Using your 2 GB a month as you want is not theft. You paid for them. AT&T's anti-consumer behavior on this encourages jailbreaking.

    That is not true.

    Your AT&T license allows you 2 GB of data WHEN USED ACCORDING TO THEIR TERMS. It does NOT allow tethering. When you download data via tethering, you are doing something that you do not have a contractual right to do - that is, taking something that AT&T has not agreed to give you. That's stealing.
  • Reply 144 of 178
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,712member
    Originally Posted by akhomerun View Post

    i find it disturbing how against jailbreaking the appleinsider community is.

    I have no problem with jailbreaking. I just want people to take the ultimate responsibility and realize if they do so, their warranty is poof. That's why I'll jailbreak my out of warranty 3G - no risk.

    What ticks me off is when people screw around with stuff they don't understand, and then think they should get *free* support for their screwup. Load Linux on your iPhone for all I (or frankly, Apple) cares. Just don't expect help from Apple if you can't get your email or make a phone call any more.

    It's doubly annoying when someone shoots themselves in the foot - like say, jailbreaking their phone which enables SSH and then doesn't bother to change the default password. An exploit comes out and suddenly Apple is the one that screwed up? What?!?

    This is the kind of thing that puts hackers in conflict with normal people and companies. And to be fair, it's more wanna-be hackers in conflict with normal people and companies - real hackers wouldn't have had the issue or whined about it in the first place.


    there is no security disadvantage to having an open computing environment

    Really? What's so magical about "open" computing environments? Are they from an alternate reality where normal rules don't apply?


    why would you think there's a security problem that needs to be solved by having a closed app store?

    Security comes down to managing risk. One of the major tenants of risk management is control. If you have more control, you have fewer variables. If you have fewer variables, you have less things to manage and your chances at maintaining security go up.

    The closed app store (walled garden, whatever) is Apples attempt to create a managed computing environment and thus manage risk. They are creating an appliance environment where things "just work" - it's all about the user experience and getting real work done. Why people are puzzled that Apple should want to do this still amazes me - for the longest time (and I still think it's in there somewhere even if they don't publish it) is the slogan "Computers for the rest of us". The Mac may be many things, but it's not a computer "for the rest of us" - since the rest of "us" (if you assume "us" is all humans) are non-technical. And the Mac, for all I love about it, is still a general purpose computer. That means software installation. Network configuration. Patching and updates. File systems. Mice and pointers on screens. All things that the average person couldn't care less about.

    That's why the iPad is so important to my father. He doesn't want a computer! He wants to surf the web, read email and get news and sports scores. The iPad does all that and more, and it does it in a very non-threatening and intuitive way.

    Software installation is easy - go to iTunes or the App store. Bam!

    Finding his stuff is easy - press the home button. Bam!

    If he gets lost or doesn't know where he is, press the home button. Bam!

    His files, pictures, etc. are always where he expects them. No rooting around in disks or folders. Bam!

    No mouse! You may laugh or take it for granted, but not everyone "gets" the mouse (or trackpad - that's real fun watching him try to use like a mouse). The iPad is very direct. There is no abstraction. You touch something on the screen and stuff happens right where you are touching it. Bam!

    It's not about Apple being greedy, trying to lock people in (or out for capricious or malicious reasons) or any of the other tin-foil conspiracy theories. It's all about delivering a controlled (i.e. AWESOME) user experience. You can't have it both ways. You can't have every choice under the sun and also have top notch reliability, drop dead simplicity, user consistency, etc.

    And, quite frankly Apple is damn good at delivering on the whole end user experience thing. You don't turn in their kind of revenue and customer satisfaction scores by jerking people around - despite all the baseless innuendo on the Internet. Are they perfect? No - but then again expecting perfection isn't rational either. But they do deliver a narrow experience that delivers what they promise. And that has incredible value to some, even if you aren't interested in it.

    It's not rocket science, but it is hard. It takes allot of work, tons of focus and the ability to ignore people clamoring for X, Y and Z. Look how long it took them to get cut copy paste out? But they did, and when they did it was far more elegant than any of the other solutions. Rather than shipping 50 broken or ill-conceived features they would rather ship five really good ones and mature into the remaining ones that make sense. If you can't appreciate that, there are plenty of other companies that will happily give you devices with feature lists that look like someone jammed a bunch of pieces of paper in a shot gun, fired it at a wall and picked the stuff that stuck.

    You can choose that, I would rather have another choice.


    why are mobile phones different than the free and open environment of the desktop pc?

    No one said they all have to be, certainly not Apple. Go knock yourself out with Android! Seriously - have fun! There are plenty of other alternatives and Apple isn't out there actively trying to stomp them down.

    However, Apple decided they were going to offer something different (hmm, Different - they seemed to have had some grammatically incorrect slogan centered around the word different too) They exploited the creation of a new platform (with fewer preconceived notions as to how it should behave) to introduce a new paradigm.

    For some reason, some people seem to insist it's all or nothing - Appstore or "Open" - that the two models can't co-exist and serve different purposes. I say that's absolutely ridiculous. Indeed, I have no doubt that at some point in the future Apple will offer laptops and desktops with iOS as well as Mac OSX. Whether it's next year or a couple of years it's just a matter of time. I also think it's ridiculous that people are insisting that Apple release an "open" iPhone or iPad. Just like they don't play in the netbook space, they don't play in that space either. It's crazy to expect them to be all things to all people.

    There is a huge target demographic that will welcome the iOS on desktops and laptops with open arms. It will be functional, it will do exactly what they want with minimal fuss or "computing" overhead and it will serve their purposes. It won't be a computer, it will be a tool. A real information appliance. Many people seem to be blind to this as a real pent-up demand, claiming that there is no market for such devices since people already have computers. Well no kidding - right now all personal computing models are the same! There's no real choice! Not everyone wants a general purpose computer, it's just that up until recently they were the only choice! If someone wanted an appliance computing model, where were they going to get it? The old WebTV? There's an example of an appliance done wrong. It doesn't mean the whole concept is junk - it just means that instance was a crap implementation.

    Then you get the techno geeks. The ones that take the mere existence of such a model as a personal affront. How Dare They! How Dare Apple Take Something Special and Trivialize It for those... those... USERS! The elitism is particularly ironic given that charge is leveled at Apple users constantly. I also have no doubt that there will be a large cadre of these vocal techie geeks that will see it as the end of the world as we know it. The utter intolerance for the mere existence of a computing model contrary to their ideals is simply irrational.

    Here's the crazy part that makes the protesting, hand wringing, weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth so rediculous - the existence of the iOS won't kill the Mac nor will it stop Windows, Linux or Android from still being options. I sincerely doubt Apple will screw with jailbreakers. If they wanted to, Apple could have really messed with jailbreakers in hardware in the 3Gs, iPhone 4 or iPad ala the DirectTV Tivos that require physical modification (desoldering and replacing a boot ROM) to jailbreak. Other than for fraudulent warranty claims, I think Apple could give two whits about jailbreakers.

    The mere existence if the iOS isn't evil. The mere existence of the iOS isn't limiting choice. That's the real irony - the existence of the iOS is a new choice. It's a widely deployed computing model that never existed before. It may not be the best fit for you, but

    what gives the critics of the iOS the right of denying someone who doesn't want a general purpose computer the choice to use a different model?

    That's the blatant hypocrisy of many of the iOS detractors that is just so crazy. If you are really for choice than you won't campaign against something just because you don't agree with the philosophy behind it. You may criticize it, but trying to stop people from using it by telling them not to buy it or suing Apple to try to force them to "comply"? Really? Sheesh!

    They are right about one thing. The iOS will change things over time. It will shift the balance of "power". Normal people will be able to compute on their own without the reliance on techies, anti-virus software and the whole cottage industry that surrounds the support of general purpose computers (including Macs). There's the real crux of the matter. Fear of change mixed with a portion of irrelevancy. Tis a bitter potion indeed!
  • Reply 145 of 178
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,712member
    Originally Posted by BUSHMAN4 View Post

    By the way being that APPLE licenses the software by jailbreaking the Iphone you void the warranty.

    Please don't confuse these concepts more than they are already misconstrued and wrongly reported.

    There is no dependency on voiding your warranty and software licensing. It's much simpler than that, the dependency is doing something outside of the terms of the warranty.

    If your iPhone case cracks because of a manufacturing defect and you have jailbroken your iPhone, that is not a valid reason for not replacing the case under warranty.

    If you jailbreak your iphone and can no longer make a phone call, you are SOL - that is a valid reason for denying your warranty claim.

    Read up on the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson-Moss_Warranty_Act

    A warranty isn't a get out of jail free card (although you wouldn't know that by the way some people act). A warranty is a contract with terms and conditions. If you violate the terms, the contract is no longer valid.

    Simple stuff, really.
  • Reply 146 of 178
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,712member
    Originally Posted by CharlesYFarley View Post

    Cheap advice: if you want to control your phones

    don't buy them from Apple! Your right, that's very simple!

    Or you could back away from the ledge, relax, jailbreak your phone and do whatever you want to with it.
  • Reply 147 of 178
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,712member
    Originally Posted by DrDoppio View Post

    Interesting... IANAL, so I must ask: can using the Safari browser void the warranty? Is this mentioned in the EULA?

    I'm pretty sure that installing any unapproved software counts - no matter the way it's installed.

    But that presents another interesting question. If a virus exploits a technical flaw in a manufacturers product and breaks it, who has the liability? The end user or the manufacturer? For the jailbreaking it's pretty clear - people have to go out of their way to visit the jailbreak web site and start the process. For un-wanted software, that's more interesting.
  • Reply 148 of 178
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,712member
    Originally Posted by ThinkKnot View Post

    Would Apple have even released their quasi-multitasking and other features if all they had to compete against was Palm? Or RIM? Or Nokia? Or Windows Mobile 6.5?

    Sure they would have - the support is pretty core in the OS. The only thing delayed were the interfaces via the SDK to the developers. But it's pretty clear, despite the wags on the 'net, that Apple intended to release an App store and SDK from day one - it just wasn't released on day one. Therefore they didn't talk about it.

    If Steve had come out the gate and said Web apps are the way to go today what would the conversation have been around? The iPhone or web apps? No - well, if web apps are today, what's coming out tomorrow? So he left today off the end of the sentence.

    Google the Osborne Effect.

    Apple is quite good at managing it.

    Apple never said web apps would be the final word - but because they didn't talk about the SDK a year before it was ready Apple somehow backtracked when they did release it? People "won" in forcing Apple to release native apps?

    Seriously? People believe this crap? Same thing for cut/copy/paste, multi-tasking and other features that the iPhone was "deficient" in.

    If Apple needs competition so bad then why was the smartphone space utterly PATHETIC before the iPhone, and still scattershot at best post iPhone?

    Please. I'm not willing to give them carte blanche, but I'm also not going shortchange them credit where credit is due. They SINGLE HANDEDLY turned the smartphone market upside down - and in a very good way. You like your Verizon android phone? Awesome. Better pucker up and kiss SJ's butt because it wouldn't exist as it does now without the competition of the iPhone. THATS the competition you should be really thankful for. How short and selective memories are. If more companies stopped worrying about Apple and started worrying about the quality of their products and the user experience they provide, things might get interesting. Apple doesn't need other companies to propel it - indeed, it's the exact opposite!

    I find it amazing and pathetic that so many still try to paint Apple as the villain or evil. The only thing Apple did was introduce a real alternative.

    They didn't artificially lower the price to capture market share. Remember the criticism of the original iPhone pricing? Yet it still sold like hotcakes.

    They didn't launch on every carrier and hand out huge subsidies to fund the phone or offer two for one specials to freeze out competitors. Remember the criticism of Apple being greedy for profit sharing with AT&T on the subscription fees? Yet AT&T is still in there, benefiting. You don't hear them complaining.

    Hell, they haven't even tried to clamp down on Jailbreakers like those "open" guys. And yet Apple are the fascists. Please!

    Apple did release a kick ass product that stands on it's own. It's popular because people want to use it. Not just because it's pretty, flashy or trendy - but because it does a set number of things and does them very well. And so what if it is pretty, flashy or trendy? Really successful products can't be those things as well as technically competent?

    Think you can do better? Go knock yourself out. But enough whining about the faults of the iOS and the "walled garden" and the need for competition from other companies. So far the only device to pass sales on an iPhone - is the next iPhone. To suggest that apple "requires" outside competition to spur them on before they have even lost momentum is just ridiculous.
  • Reply 149 of 178
    drdoppiodrdoppio Posts: 1,132member
    Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

    ...If a virus exploits a technical flaw in a manufacturers product and breaks it, who has the liability? The end user or the manufacturer? ...

    Exactly. If the slider says "slide to jailbreak", you probably know you are doing something Apple did not approve. But what if a malicious person puts online a seemingly innocuous hack that "jailbreaks" your phone without informing you? In that case, you are a victim of the hacker, but you also have the provider of the software to blame for not ensuring sufficient security during normal use of the browser. They wouldn't be able to just dismiss a security flaw by telling you to browse differently.

    Or... would they?
  • Reply 150 of 178
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,712member
    Originally Posted by str1f3 View Post

    Then again I'm a minimalist who wants the best available features without the complexity.

    And that is why people who value "open" or have the desire to jailbreak can't grok your POV. To them computing is something to do in and of itself. That there might be others (even more frightening if it's a large group of others) that don't value the same things they do is incomprehensible. Or easier to marginalize/ignore. Take your pick.

    To all the Trymee's out there - I have windows computers, and I enjoy tinkering with them to do certain things. I have several Macintosh's, and I enjoy using them for what I use them for. But I also have an iPhone and iPad, and I enjoy them for all their strengths.

    If I wanted to geek out and tinker with an Android or some other phone, I would do so. But I don't want to. I just want it to work. And I'm glad the alternative that is the iOS exists. Rather than attacking, criticizing or otherwise being negative, how about just sharing in the fact that the iOS is appealing to people other than yourselves and being happy for them in their choice?
  • Reply 151 of 178
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,712member
    Originally Posted by ascii View Post

    Even if you can trick Safari in to running your code, how come Safari is running as a user that can modify the OS files in the first place? Given Safari's (and other browsers) track record shouldn't it have a low privilege account?

    Very good questions. It will be interesting to learn more as time goes on, but this does seem like a pretty serious (and embarrassing) gaffe.

    However, it still doesn't invalidate the model Apple is working under with the iOS, although I can hear the arguments now
  • Reply 152 of 178
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,712member
    Originally Posted by SendMe View Post

    Why doesn't Apple limit the websites people are allowed to visit? That way, we wouldn't be taking these kinds of risks. We could know that if we visit a website that Apple coded into our iPhone as "allowed", we would be better off knowing it would not harm our device.

    Because Apple's not the big brother they are made out to be? Because the whole "evil dictator" argument is a red herring by people intolerant of computing models that differ from their perceived norms?

    Naw.... never!
  • Reply 153 of 178
    I love it BUT I don't understand those who are against jailbreak, I can install apps are not approved by apple and I can unlock by tomorrow.
  • Reply 154 of 178
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,712member
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

    1) If unlocking your phone is now legal in the USA, then Apple could just sell the phones unlocked from now on. They already do in many other countries and the exclusivity clause is about to run out with AT&T anyway.

    That's a carrier lock (of the radio) not a jail or software restriction of the OS.

    Although I do agree that carriers or manufacturers should be forced to unlock your phone's radio at the end of your contract with them if you bought it subsidized, and that they should be forced to offer an unlocked model if they sell them full price and un-subsidized.


    2) The simplest strategy to fight jailbreaking, and one that Apple has been using all along, is to remove the reasons for jailbreaking by adding functionality to the phone.

    That's the best kind of cat and mouse - filling people's desires in the first place.


    3) Leave off the hard core pornography, but put the reasonable adult stuff back in the store and set everyone's iPhone to a moderate level of parental controls by default.

    That sounds nice, but it's probably far from a trivial issue. What if the App/Store in iTunes as it's currently structured isn't able to hide segregate adult content sufficiently? I have a sneaking suspicion there are significant and real technical reasons why Apple is porn adverse - and it's far more than them just being prudes And even if they are, Safari and the whole Internet is still out there. I fail to see how this is such a barn burner of an issue other than people having issues with restrictions. In which case they are nuts for getting an iPhone anyway!


    If they do those three things then stealing apps becomes pretty much the entire and only reason to jailbreak, and that is still 100% illegal and can be dealt with.

    Other than tethering, for the VAST majority of people, there is little reason to jailbreak. And even the tethering thing is an extreme edge case that is amplified because we are surrounding ourselves with other technical users complaining about problems that affect technical people.

    I also hope that the tethering thing resolves itself through saner billing practices. AT&T has gone tiered, and while many decried it - i say it's long overdue. Now what they need to do is for people on tiered plans drop the separate tethering restrictions and fees. If the tethering plan at least came with a couple of extra gigabytes of data they might be able to justify a tethering fee, but right now they just look like insufferably greedy ba****ds. Just drop the tethering and let people make up the difference in usage. Bits are bits - it shouldn't matter how they are consumed. In the long run AT&T would more than likely get far more revenue from tethering by not nickel and diming people to death. All you do is make people hyper aware of what they are paying, which also motivates them to keep those costs under control. Not exactly positive for revenue!

    On the surface .99 cent songs on iTunes seemed nuts, but it lowered the barrier to resistance and now look at the success of iTunes. You think other companies (hello MPAA!) would see this - but change is scary as "saying the course" is perceived to be safer - so we continue to tread water.
  • Reply 155 of 178
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,712member
    Originally Posted by davidcarswell View Post

    Bricking is sooo loosely used and so outrageously rare that you obviously are a part of the problem

    See the post from Freddy right below the post from you I am quoting? While his phone may be recoverable he does't know how to do it. For him, it's bricked. Now what's he supposed to do?

    Yup, I realize it's a problem of his own making and no, I don't think it's a reason to try to stop jailbreaking, but to pretend that jailbreaking is all puppies and unicorns is being disingenuous. It does cost Apple money, and that's not right.

    So I don't blame them if they do something that effectively locks it out via software. Actually I am rather surprised that in either the iPad or the iPhone 4 they didn't. They certainly could have fixed things to the point where it would require physical modification - and if physical modification required going into one of the major chips like the A4 then jailbreaking would be moot for 99.9% of all users. Granted, that per-chip customization would make the A4 prohibitively expensive, so I don't see it happening there - even if they did it in a ROM chip that could be desoldered and replaced (like my Tivo example) it would still lock it out for all but the most determined.

    Rather trivial for them to do as part of the design process, yet they haven't bothered.

    Interesting, no?
  • Reply 156 of 178
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,712member
    Originally Posted by DrDoppio View Post

    And what do you think banning Flash was about?

    A crappy user experience due to poor performance and shortened battery life?

    What do you think it was about?

    If you think it's about control of which web sites you can go to, then the whole open safari is in conflict with your thesis.
  • Reply 157 of 178
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,757member
    Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

    Wait until a real bad bug gets loose and pwns jailbroken iPhones along with user data, password, and account numbers.

    I wonder who will get the blame? Is there any question who it will be? What will the trolls attack as an insecure, useless device? Who will the tech blogs go after? The iPhone Dev-Team? The ass hat users who compromised their phones? The malware author? Nope. We all know who they will go after don't we.

    Seriously? Wake the f*ck up. Look beyond your desire to malign jailbreaker.

    To quote Gruber ?remote code exploit now in the wild?

    Think about that for a second. If any platform has a hole big enough to allow a web page, malicious or otherwise, to root your device, then Apple isn't really blameless, are they. Accidents happen. Stop trying to deflect.
  • Reply 158 of 178
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,757member
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

    Yes, this is a serious flaw that needs to be fixed.

    The difference, of course, is that you have to intentionally go to the site and tell the site to jailbreak your phone in order to do anything. That's quite different from malware that steals your personal information without you doing anything (or simply downloading a wallpaper app).

    As I said - it needs to be fixed. It's not at this point a serious issue - because the only people going to that site and telling it to break their phone are ones who presumably know what they're doing.

    Are you for real? It isn't a serious issue? To again quote Gruber ?remote code exploit now in the wild?. Think about that for a second and I dare you to say again "It's not at this point a serious issue." You think only one site has this exploit active? I hope so. Cuz if other do, they probably won't be as benign as this site.
  • Reply 159 of 178
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,712member
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

    Yep. It?s one thing to access your system with a direct connect hack, but to access it via a website means that Safari and iOS has a major hole.

    Another comforting thought. Is it just the iOS?

    The underpinnings of Safari and the iOS are shared with Mac OSX. Is this exploit flexible enough to grant root access on Mac OS X with Safari on Mac OS X?


    Apple has a serious issue indeed. Here's to hoping they don't take two weeks to address it
  • Reply 160 of 178
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,757member
Sign In or Register to comment.