Posted by Boinng
I think my point's pretty clear Ryan, why are you so hostile to it?
The jailbroken software you're using, btw - do you know what's in it? Exactly what it does and where it came from? Whose word are you taking that it's safe, and how do you know that they fully understand everything that software does?
I mentioned an extreme example before - an app that secretly dialled a premium rate number - but that's a difficult thing to hide and would be apparent the first time somebody checked their online billing. What about an app that whilst it was doing something completely innocent and useful on the face of it, was quietly uploading users contacts to a server somewhere. Think how much money you could make from illicit spammers with a list of email addresses culled from every jailbroken iPhone user out there. How much of that kind of info could you harvest from thousands of users before that code was spotted?
Posted by carkitter
The SMS vulnerability exists for all iPhones because the SMS app provides access to the root user and code can take control of the device by having admin priviliges. Other apps are sandboxed so no vulnerablity here but jailbreaking bypasses most of Apples security so a potential exists and the jailbreaking community should be upfront about it.
I doubt there are enough jailbroken iPhones to take advantage of for a malicious app to be worthwile. Certainly it's creator could be traced and hackers don't usually hack other hackers anyway.
I would like to see Apple fix this SMS vulerabily pretty quickly considering the potential for misuse.
[ This Message was edited by: carkitter on 2009-07-06 20:58 ]
Posted by NoKia
Lol so makes u guys think that the 'jailbreaking community' are not aware of these issues before u kindly brought it to our attention? It's just like owning a pc, if u click the wrong link or install the wrong software ur can compromise it, or would u suggest we all give up pcs bcus ppl write viruses? It's all about common sense
Posted by RyaN
On 2009-07-06 21:43:25, carkitter wrote:
I doubt there are enough jailbroken iPhones to take advantage of for a malicious app to be worthwile. Certainly it's creator could be traced and hackers don't usually hack other hackers anyway.
Nail on head there mate.
Posted by Boinng
If "hackers don't usually hack other hackers" why is virtually every other warez download a trojan or virus?
Sorry, but this just seems to be an exploit waiting to happen. With trusting attitudes like these (it's never happened in "all these years" and all) the average jailbreaker, who these days is basically any kid who's applied an easy two minute software tweak provided to them by the dev team, is wide open to an attack like this.
Easy pickings.
[ This Message was edited by: Boinng on 2009-07-07 09:35 ]
Posted by RyaN
Why do you care though? You're unjailbroken.
My, so you call it, 'trusting' attitude is because I know what I'm doing when it comes to the iPhone's modified FW. There is such a thing called a community out there and if people aren't prepared to learn about what they're doing to their devices then they deserve to have something happen to theirs tbh.
Posted by carkitter
On 2009-07-06 23:23:58, NoKia wrote:
Lol so makes u guys think that the 'jailbreaking community' are not aware of these issues before u kindly brought it to our attention? It's just like owning a pc, if u click the wrong link or install the wrong software ur can compromise it, or would u suggest we all give up pcs bcus ppl write viruses? It's all about common sense
Not that we brought it to your attention but that you should have brought it to ours.
Everything I've read online (until now) has given me the impression that there isg no point in virus' for the iPhone and even the article I referenced said that the iPhone is even more secure than a mac - yet this level of 'percieved immunity' doesn't extend to jailbreaking and jailbreakers have known all along?...
[ This Message was edited by: carkitter on 2009-07-07 11:28 ]
Posted by NoKia
On 2009-07-07 12:26:02, carkitter wrote:
On 2009-07-06 23:23:58, NoKia wrote:
Lol so makes u guys think that the 'jailbreaking community' are not aware of these issues before u kindly brought it to our attention? It's just like owning a pc, if u click the wrong link or install the wrong software ur can compromise it, or would u suggest we all give up pcs bcus ppl write viruses? It's all about common sense
Not that we brought it to your attention but that you should have brought it to ours.
Everything I've read online (until now) has given me the impression that there isg no point in virus' for the iPhone and even the article I referenced said that the iPhone is even more secure than a mac - yet this level of 'percieved immunity' doesn't extend to jailbreaking and jailbreakers have known all along?...
[ This Message was edited by: carkitter on 2009-07-07 11:28 ]
but there is no virus, apart from the malicious premium rate dialling virus that only exists in the imagination of boinng, in the real world there hasnt been an incidence of an iphone virus, yes jailbreaking may remove some protection(that itself is theoretical) so potentially a virus can be written, same way potentially any random occurence can exist for any hypothetical situation, but the fact is when u buy a pc noone has to tell you that u have be careful of what u install, treat your phone the same way, its like buying a car and complaining that noone told you that its dangerous to pour water in the petrol tank!
do you really need a press release to inform you of the dangers of hacking something? isnt it just commonsense to assume it?
Posted by Boinng
If everyone knows how to be careful with their PCs then why are there so many viruses and compromised PCs out there? And that's with antivirus widely available for free, and preinstalled on most new PCs. There's no such protection on the iPhone, jailbroken or not, so how can they be compared?
Even with the lowly amount of security provided by Microsoft, if a piece of PC software removed or bypassed (as a by-product) 80% of the security features in Windows, you'd probably want somebody to tell you, right?
I think the reaction to all this is pretty interesting.
[ This Message was edited by: Boinng on 2009-07-07 12:22 ]
Posted by NoKia
Ok, if u need it spelt out, Jailbreaking is dangerous do it at ur own risk
I hope this satisfies ur concerns
Posted by RyaN
On 2009-07-07 13:00:04, Boinng wrote:
If everyone knows how to be careful with their PCs then why are there so many viruses and compromised PCs out there? And that's with antivirus widely available for free, and preinstalled on most new PCs. There's no such protection on the iPhone, jailbroken or not, so how can they be compared?
Even with the lowly amount of security provided by Microsoft, if a piece of PC software removed or bypassed (as a by-product) 80% of the security features in Windows, you'd probably want somebody to tell you, right?
I think the reaction to all this is pretty interesting.
[ This Message was edited by: Boinng on 2009-07-07 12:22 ]
The reason viruses are written for Windows is because the majority of people/businesses have PC's therefore a wider audience. Not as many people own Macs therefore no point wasting time writing viruses for them
Same goes for iPhone... even more so these days, less and less people are jailbreaking therefore what is the point in writing a virus for a user base of let's say 5% (that's a guess btw)
I think your reaction to this is pretty interesting. Or should I say predictable.
Posted by masseur
enough already guys...
talk about flogging a dead horse!
Posted by Boinng
On 2009-07-07 14:11:14, RyaN wrote:
The reason viruses are written for Windows is because the majority of people/businesses have PC's therefore a wider audience. Not as many people own Macs therefore no point wasting time writing viruses for them
This isn't a PC vs Mac argument - in this context the iPhone is the PC of the smartphone world, since it's so popular, mainstream, and its users actually install a lot of apps - more so than most of the competition. If you were going to target a smartphone OS with a virus, which would you choose?
Same goes for iPhone... even more so these days, less and less people are jailbreaking therefore what is the point in writing a virus for a user base of let's say 5% (that's a guess btw)
A guess - but even if you're right, there must be at least 15m iPhones out there now and that's a very conservative guess itself - that means 750,000 potential targets. Insignificant? If you got 5p for each of their contact files, that's £37,500 in the bank. Still far fetched?
Edit - ok Masseur, that's my last neigh on the subject..
[ This Message was edited by: Boinng on 2009-07-07 13:24 ]
Posted by RyaN
@masseur Agreed. Can't see the point in this... going nowhere - fast
On a different, more relevant note.
A new app was released yesterday called 'Prowl' - which pushes Growl notifications from your MAC to your iPhone
''Prowl is a Growl client for the iPhone. Notifications from your Mac can be sent to your iPhone over push, with a full range of customization and grace you expect.''
Source: http://prowl.weks.net/
This definitely looks like one of the best uses of push besides IM since the feature was released. I hoping that this is able to be integrated with Growl for Windows
Posted by carkitter
On 2009-07-07 12:36:59, NoKia wrote:
but there is no virus,...
Software Testing 101: You can never say there are no defects, just that you haven't found one yet. Once you find one, you can say with certainty that this is not a defect-free environment.
On 2009-07-07 12:36:59, NoKia wrote:
...its like buying a car and complaining that noone told you that its dangerous to pour water in the petrol tank!
do you really need a press release to inform you of the dangers of hacking something? isnt it just commonsense to assume it?
No, it's like me telling you I can make your car faster without impacting the reliability of the engine.
Then you drop off your car to me, I give it back later and it goes faster!
Then someone tells you months later that my modification consists of removing the Anti-Lock Braking System, Traction Control, 10 Airbags, all the associatiated wiring and ECU's for a weight saving of 100kgs.
Just don't have an accident, that's all...
As my iPhone is not jailbroken, I'm more interested in the SMS vulnerability which I think is quite embarressing for Apple and this is a developing story, since the guy Miller is going to do a presentation at the end of the month detailing the vulnerability in all it's glory. I hope Apple have a countermeasure out by then. Read more about it on Ars Technica
Posted by RyaN
On 2009-07-07 14:28:01, RyaN wrote:
A new app was released yesterday called 'Prowl' - which pushes Growl notifications from your MAC to your iPhone
''Prowl is a Growl client for the iPhone. Notifications from your Mac can be sent to your iPhone over push, with a full range of customization and grace you expect.''
Source: http://prowl.weks.net/
This definitely looks like one of the best uses of push besides IM since the feature was released. I hoping that this is able to be integrated with Growl for Windows
Further to this, if anyone is interested in this here...
Growlforwindows aka GfW now supports the Prowl application from the App Store
However, app support for GfW is minimal...there is the ability to write your own apps with the source codes provided on the GfW website, if you are competent with programming of course.
If anyone is unsure of what Prowl does, it displays Push notifications on your iPhone via Growl servers from your Mac/PC... so if you pop away from your PC for a while then this could be a very handy tool for not missing that all important notification.
The PC version of Growl currently has apps like Twitulater (Twitter client) Firefox, System Management, GMail (so basically you can get GMail pushed to your iPhone - schweeeet) and other apps like iTunes and a couple more..
You can also ping your iPhone with text from the Prowl website and it'll display a PUSH notification on the iPhone.
Posted by NoKia
On 2009-07-08 01:57:34, carkitter wrote:
Software Testing 101: You can never say there are no defects, just that you haven't found one yet. Once you find one, you can say with certainty that this is not a defect-free environment.
hilarious!, a virus is not a bug or a defect, its a purposely created external program, software testing your own code does not cover code that u didnt even create
i wont even comment on that completely over the top car analogy
anyways lets just end this, the arguments are just getting more circular and ridiculous
you be happy with ur non-jailbroken phone and leave me to be happy with mine, i dont see why u guys are so worked up about a process u dont even want
[ This Message was edited by: NoKia on 2009-07-09 07:50 ]
Posted by carkitter
On 2009-07-09 08:49:49, NoKia wrote:
On 2009-07-08 01:57:34, carkitter wrote:
Software Testing 101: You can never say there are no defects, just that you haven't found one yet. Once you find one, you can say with certainty that this is not a defect-free environment.
hilarious!, a virus is not a bug or a defect, its a purposely created external program, software testing your own code does not cover code that u didnt even create
i wont even comment on that completely over the top car analogy
anyways lets just end this, the arguments are just getting more circular and ridiculous
you be happy with ur non-jailbroken phone and leave me to be happy with mine, i dont see why u guys are so worked up about a process u dont even want
[ This Message was edited by: NoKia on 2009-07-09 07:50 ]
I thought you'd catch the principle that you can't rule something out (like a virus) when you can't feasibly check the entire internet for the presence of it, you can only say with certainly it's there once you find it. This principle is in the first chapter of the Software Testing book I'm reading ATM and is borrowed from general scientific testing.
As a qualified mechanic I feel confident to make car analogies.
Up until firmware 3.0, jailbreaking was always an option for me and the question was 'Am I missing out on something important?' but no longer.
Posted by RyaN
Off to Lakeside tomorrow to swap over my iPhone - finally!! Booked in for 15:45, damn Bluewater store had zero availability til 18:00. But hopefully, fingers crossed, I should have a spanking new iPhone 3G in my hands tomo
Posted by RyaN
Can someone help me, I'm sure I read somewhere that Apple Stores now repair smashed glass on iPhone's in house while you wait, and for free if you are still within the warranty period (and a cost if you are outside it) Someone at work has this unfortunate situation and was just wondering if anyone can point me in the direction of some literature which states this
Posted by Boinng
There's some info on in-shop repairs here - http://theappleblog.com/2009/[....]phone-displays-while-you-wait/ - that's all in the US mind, not sure if it applies to UK stores.
The hitch is the whole warranty thing - if the glass is broken because your friend broke it somehow (other than some form of manufacturing defect) it won't be covered, so in all probability it'll cost him.
Posted by RyaN
Cool cheers. Was digging around also and came up with the same topic - eventually! Indeed it looks like it's only covered if the crack(s) in the glass are due to a manufacturing defect.. otherwise it'll cost £130 (or $199). Still, personally I don't think it's too bad...but perhaps as in this case her warranty runs out on 21st July, might as well try one of these third party places (which'll void the warranty obviously) or a DIY (for her though, probably not a good idea!!!)
Maybe if 'you' only had the phone a couple of months I reckon it's definitely worth paying Apple to ££ to do it in order to keep the warranty intact
Posted by Boinng
Yep, not the cheapest thing in the world, but not the end of the world at that price either - worth it if you're still under contract and/or warranty for a while yet.
They should bring back the metal back and put tempered glass on the next one, you'd never need another phone..
Posted by MWEB
On 2009-07-10 16:37:42, Boinng wrote:
Yep, not the cheapest thing in the world, but not the end of the world at that price either - worth it if you're still under contract and/or warranty for a while yet.
They should bring back the metal back and put tempered glass on the next one, you'd never need another phone..
I'm running a 3G S, Omnia HD, Pixon, Storm, Renoir, concurrently , the Apple cam is still pretty much garbage, at least it's marginally better than the storms
Posted by RyaN
Lol which one is the best though overall Mark?
Posted by dicky
well it certainly wont be the storm, which is a big pile of shit!
Posted by RyaN
Yeh I can't understand why on earth u added that to your collection when you've got the Bold for BB means, and the iPhone really can't be beaten ATM for touch screen goodness
Posted by Boinng
I had a play around with the storm a few weeks ago.. very strange beast. The screen couldn't feel more breakable if they tried, the whole idea of pushing it in as one big giant button feels so clunky and odd - it's like the designers started off with a list of everything that's good about a traditional Blackberry, and everything that's good about touchscreen phones, and then decided to create the exact opposite of both!
Posted by RyaN
Oh btw, got my replacement from Apple on Saturday, swapped out for a new one without question. Extended limited warranty until Oct now which is good, but hopefully I will have a 3GS by then...
Dare I say it as well that I was using the iPhone unjailbroken up until last night and I was actually enjoying the fact that it just works, no slow down etc. However, I got too pissed off with the poor Push Notification system and had to JB just to install GriP. I'm trimming back this time though, no WinterBoard or themes for the moment...
Posted by MWEB
On 2009-07-10 18:07:26, RyaN wrote:
Lol which one is the best though overall Mark?
They each have pro's and con's, which is exactly why i will never settle on just one device
Posted by RyaN
For those Southerners among us
The Apple Store in Brighton opens it's doors on Saturday 25th July 2009. The first 1000 customers receive a free Apple t-shirt.
I'm there!!
Posted by masseur
thats THIS saturday coming then
I assume by "customers" that you need to buy something to get the free t-shirt?
edit: I just got the email.. its first 1000 "visitors" - No purchase necessary. While supplies last.
might see you there!
[ This Message was edited by: masseur on 2009-07-21 11:09 ]
Posted by masseur
for those fans on Flight Control, there is now Harbour Master which is almost as addictive
Posted by RyaN
On 2009-07-21 11:43:19, masseur wrote:
thats THIS saturday coming then
I assume by "customers" that you need to buy something to get the free t-shirt?
edit: I just got the email.. its first 1000 "visitors" - No purchase necessary. While supplies last.
might see you there!
[ This Message was edited by: masseur on 2009-07-21 11:09 ]
I want that t-shirt! LOL
Indeed mate - be there, or be square
Posted by NoKia
Hilarious claims by Apple in their never ending quest to make jailbreaking officially illegal
drug dealers??
A few months back, Apple made a plea to the Copyright Office to make jailbreaking illegal. The EFF called their reasoning "absurd" and "FUD." It's still sitting before them to make a decision.
Apparently, Apple feels they are in a losing battle and are now throwing out some pretty far-fetched reasons to the Copyright Office in order to back up their case. For one, they say jailbreaking could let users alter the Exclusive Chip Identification number, letting the jailbreaker make anonymous calls. They say "this would be desirable to drug dealers."
In further claims, they say jailbreaking could lead to cell towers or networks being taken down Hacks to the baseband processor (BBP) would mean “a local or international hacker could potentially initiate commands (such as a denial of service attack) that could crash the tower software, rendering the tower entirely inoperable to process calls or transmit data... taking control of the BBP software would be much the equivalent of getting inside the firewall of a corporate computer — to potentially catastrophic result."
Or maybe... Apple enjoys the success of the AppStore, and doesn't want anyone else encroaching on that market. The Cydia Store, Rock Your Phone, and various other non-AppStore sales methods are appearing, and gaining in popularity. If the AppStore is no longer the ONLY way to vend your app, theme (try getting one of THOSE from the AppStore), or tweak, Apple stands to lose some of that valued income. And therein lies the real issue.
I recently bought Coda for my Mac. Panic makes great software. When I bought this... I just used Safari. I went to their website, I downloaded the app, and I paid them through their own payment system. I didn't have to go to an Apple store. I didn't have to open iTunes to buy my Mac software. In fact, Apple wasn't involved in any way at all other than creating a beautiful piece of hardware and a slick operating system which my copy of Coda runs on. Can you imagine the outrage if you could NEVER buy (or get freely) any software for your Mac except through iTunes? Control...
And guess what? Professional hackers could, using only a Mac connected to the internet, gain access to all sorts of high-level secure sites, and wreak who knows what havoc. Does that mean all software for every Mac should go through Apple?
What all this "jailbreaking is illegal" nonsense comes down to is Apple attempting to maintain their absolute control on all software for the iPhone - which is flat out insulting. This doesn't fly with any other device... why should it with iPhone?
Apparently, Apple feels they are in a losing battle and are now throwing out some pretty far-fetched reasons to the Copyright Office in order to back up their case. For one, they say jailbreaking could let users alter the Exclusive Chip Identification number, letting the jailbreaker make anonymous calls. They say "this would be desirable to drug dealers."
In further claims, they say jailbreaking could lead to cell towers or networks being taken down Hacks to the baseband processor (BBP) would mean “a local or international hacker could potentially initiate commands (such as a denial of service attack) that could crash the tower software, rendering the tower entirely inoperable to process calls or transmit data... taking control of the BBP software would be much the equivalent of getting inside the firewall of a corporate computer — to potentially catastrophic result."
Or maybe... Apple enjoys the success of the AppStore, and doesn't want anyone else encroaching on that market. The Cydia Store, Rock Your Phone, and various other non-AppStore sales methods are appearing, and gaining in popularity. If the AppStore is no longer the ONLY way to vend your app, theme (try getting one of THOSE from the AppStore), or tweak, Apple stands to lose some of that valued income. And therein lies the real issue.
I recently bought Coda for my Mac. Panic makes great software. When I bought this... I just used Safari. I went to their website, I downloaded the app, and I paid them through their own payment system. I didn't have to go to an Apple store. I didn't have to open iTunes to buy my Mac software. In fact, Apple wasn't involved in any way at all other than creating a beautiful piece of hardware and a slick operating system which my copy of Coda runs on. Can you imagine the outrage if you could NEVER buy (or get freely) any software for your Mac except through iTunes? Control...
And guess what? Professional hackers could, using only a Mac connected to the internet, gain access to all sorts of high-level secure sites, and wreak who knows what havoc. Does that mean all software for every Mac should go through Apple?
What all this "jailbreaking is illegal" nonsense comes down to is Apple attempting to maintain their absolute control on all software for the iPhone - which is flat out insulting. This doesn't fly with any other device... why should it with iPhone?
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/07/jailbreak/
The nation’s cellphone networks could suffer “potentially catastrophic” cyberattacks by iPhone-wielding hackers at home and abroad if iPhone owners are permitted to legally jailbreak their shiny wireless devices — that’s what Apple claims.
A jailbroken iPhone is a weapon of mass disruption, Apple claims.
The Copyright Office is considering a request by the Electronic Frontier Foundation to legalize the widespread practice of jailbreaking, in which iPhone owners hack their devices to accept software that hasn’t been approved for distribution through the iPhone App Store. Apple made the claim in comments filed last week (.pdf) with the agency.
The company’s filing explained that jailbreaking could allow hackers to altering the iPhone’s BBP — the “baseband processor” software, which enables a connection to cell phone towers.
By tinkering with this code, “a local or international hacker could potentially initiate commands (such as a denial of service attack) that could crash the tower software, rendering the tower entirely inoperable to process calls or transmit data,” Apple wrote the government. “Taking control of the BBP software would be much the equivalent of getting inside the firewall of a corporate computer — to potentially catastrophic result.
“The technological protection measures were designed into the iPhone precisely to prevent these kinds of pernicious activities, and if granted, the jailbreaking exemption would open the door to them,” Apple added.
Threat Level had no idea the iPhone was so dangerous. We’re gratified that Apple locked down this potential weapon of mass disruption before hackers could unleash cybarmageddon. This also explains why Apple rejected the official Google Voice App for the iPhone this week. We thought it was because Google Voice posed a threat to AT&T’s exclusivity deal with Apple. Now we know it threatened national security.
At stake for Apple is the closed business model it has enjoyed since 2007, when the iPhone debuted. More than 30 million phones have been sold. Apple has told the Copyright Office that its locked-down platform is what made the iPhone’s success possible.
The EFF has asked the regulators for the DMCA exemption, (.pdf) which would allow consumers to run any app on the phone, including those not authorized by Apple.
Fred von Lohmann, the EFF attorney who made the request, said Apple’s latest claims are preposterous. During a May public hearing on the issue in Palo Alto, California, he told regulators there were as many as a million unauthorized, jailbroken phones.
In an interview Tuesday, he said he suspected those phones have not been used to destroy mobile phone towers. “As far as I know, nothing like that has ever happened,” he said.
He added that, if Apple’s argument was correct, the open-source Android phone from Google on T-Mobile networks would also be a menace to society. ”This kind of theoretical threat,” von Lohmann said, “is more FUD than truth.”
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 says “no person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.” But under the law, every three years the Librarian of Congress and the Copyright Office must consider the public’s requests for exemptions to that anti-circumvention language.
Apple also claimed that jailbreaking would pave the way for hackers to alter the Exclusive Chip Identification number that identified the phone to the cell tower, which could enable calls to be made anonymously. Apple said “this would be desirable to drug dealers.”
A jailbroken iPhone is a weapon of mass disruption, Apple claims.
The Copyright Office is considering a request by the Electronic Frontier Foundation to legalize the widespread practice of jailbreaking, in which iPhone owners hack their devices to accept software that hasn’t been approved for distribution through the iPhone App Store. Apple made the claim in comments filed last week (.pdf) with the agency.
The company’s filing explained that jailbreaking could allow hackers to altering the iPhone’s BBP — the “baseband processor” software, which enables a connection to cell phone towers.
By tinkering with this code, “a local or international hacker could potentially initiate commands (such as a denial of service attack) that could crash the tower software, rendering the tower entirely inoperable to process calls or transmit data,” Apple wrote the government. “Taking control of the BBP software would be much the equivalent of getting inside the firewall of a corporate computer — to potentially catastrophic result.
“The technological protection measures were designed into the iPhone precisely to prevent these kinds of pernicious activities, and if granted, the jailbreaking exemption would open the door to them,” Apple added.
Threat Level had no idea the iPhone was so dangerous. We’re gratified that Apple locked down this potential weapon of mass disruption before hackers could unleash cybarmageddon. This also explains why Apple rejected the official Google Voice App for the iPhone this week. We thought it was because Google Voice posed a threat to AT&T’s exclusivity deal with Apple. Now we know it threatened national security.
At stake for Apple is the closed business model it has enjoyed since 2007, when the iPhone debuted. More than 30 million phones have been sold. Apple has told the Copyright Office that its locked-down platform is what made the iPhone’s success possible.
The EFF has asked the regulators for the DMCA exemption, (.pdf) which would allow consumers to run any app on the phone, including those not authorized by Apple.
Fred von Lohmann, the EFF attorney who made the request, said Apple’s latest claims are preposterous. During a May public hearing on the issue in Palo Alto, California, he told regulators there were as many as a million unauthorized, jailbroken phones.
In an interview Tuesday, he said he suspected those phones have not been used to destroy mobile phone towers. “As far as I know, nothing like that has ever happened,” he said.
He added that, if Apple’s argument was correct, the open-source Android phone from Google on T-Mobile networks would also be a menace to society. ”This kind of theoretical threat,” von Lohmann said, “is more FUD than truth.”
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 says “no person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.” But under the law, every three years the Librarian of Congress and the Copyright Office must consider the public’s requests for exemptions to that anti-circumvention language.
Apple also claimed that jailbreaking would pave the way for hackers to alter the Exclusive Chip Identification number that identified the phone to the cell tower, which could enable calls to be made anonymously. Apple said “this would be desirable to drug dealers.”
[ This Message was edited by: NoKia on 2009-07-30 15:53 ]
Posted by intelegent115
Sorry for changing the direction in which this discusion was going..
I could really use an advice right now
I bought a cheap iPhone 3G 16GB white yesterday,.. It was in really good condition and I was really happy about it.
When i got home, first thing i did was a fresh restore and activation via iTunes.
When i tried WiFi it found no hotspots!
First i did a reset of modem, router and then the phone.
Nothing helped,.. My friends iPhone 3G finds 2 networks, and is able to connect and surf through them..
I tried again today @ work.. we have at least 5 wifi hotspots here. iPhone says no wifi here! Again my friends iPhone finds 5,6 hotspots..
I believe this should of been a hardware issue. My phone is still under warranty but there is no apple presence in my country
Since the phone was bought in Italy i will probably take it there for repair / new unit. My main concerns are:
-how long will i be without my phone?
-will they actually fix my WiFi issue?
-i heard a lot of people saying they got their phones back in same condition as they sent it in for repair.. ?
Anyone had similar situation or knows someone who did?
Any help / advice would be much apreciated.
Posted by frank2345babies
I had this same problem with my old 3g it was only about 2 months old. It used a wifi network once and then never consistantly got signal again. When I took it to the apple store genius bar they tried it out and as it didn't connect they just swapped it for a new iPhone out right. There and then whole process took 10 mins
Posted by Boinng
Bit unhappy about this - http://www.tuaw.com/2009/09/1[....]e-encryption-policy-may-block/
Basically it means that any 3G (or 2G) iPhone upgraded to 3.1 may no longer work with your Exchange server, if said server is running Exchange 2007 and requires encryption. Previously they worked fine, but only - apparently - because the iPhone software was ignoring this encryption flag, because the device didn't support it. Now that the 3G S is out, and has the hardware to support encryption, Apple have decided to "fix" this "bug".
Right now it doesn't effect me in the slightest - my work server is Exchange 2003 and everything's working fine. But it's inivetable that at some point, the IT people will decide to upgrade, and some bright spark will decide to enforce the encryption feature to cover their backs, and one of the most used everyday features of my iPhone will become useless. The only solution to this will be to jailbreak and downgrade in some way, losing whatever functionality and security in the process, or upgrade at great cost to the 3G S. Bearing in mind that I (like many people) bought my iPhone in 2008 partly on the strength of its Exchange-compatible claims, to find that I may need to junk it in favour of a newer model to support Exchange 2007 is a bit of a bitter pill.
In reality I was probably always going to upgrade again at the end of my contract anyway (or at least once the successor to the 3G S is announced) but I just hate the idea that I now have to, due to some shennanigans on Apple's part.
Posted by londonlad123
Tell me about it.
I dont see any reason why the software cannot apply the encryption for the 3gs and not apply encryption for the 2g/3g as before 3.1.