Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Software Businesses Cellphones Communications Apple

Unreleased iPhone 2.0 May Already Be Hacked 183

Posted by Zonk from the who-gave-the-hackers-time-travel-machines dept.
The as-yet unreleased second iteration of iPhone hardware may already be compromised, reports Engadget and News.com. Members of the 'iPhone Dev Team' have (supposedly) made use of the recently released SDK to gin up a Beta 2.0 software hack. "Unlike previous hacks, this one isn't specific to the latest firmware version, it exploits the way that Apple designed the iPhone's main bootloader. According to the iPhone Dev Team, the iPhone verifies whether or not firmware code has been signed with an RSA certificate before allowing it to be written to memory. The team has apparently figured out a way to disable that check and allow unsigned code to be written to memory."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Unreleased iPhone 2.0 May Already Be Hacked More

Unreleased iPhone 2.0 May Already Be Hacked

Comments Filter:

  • Pertinent word... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by the_skywise ( 189793 ) on Sunday March 16, 2008 @07:31PM (#22768580)
    WAS...

    I'm sure the iPhone 2 will be held back until this is fixed.

  • Feasable? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by PolarBearFire ( 1176791 ) on Sunday March 16, 2008 @07:55PM (#22768764)
    This thread is probably going to be full of sofware security bashing, deservedly or not. Let's get something constructive out of this... Anyone know of any way to make software security function the way business people dream of? Namely, only approved code running approved processes. I think given access to the hardware any machine can be "hacked" given enough interest and manpower. Even putting security features in the chips themselves, as I've heard they are developing, will just be a relatively minor roadblock.

  • Re:Pertinent word... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by arminw ( 717974 ) on Sunday March 16, 2008 @08:03PM (#22768842)
    ....I develop a killer phone app.......

    If you do, so what? You still have to sell it somehow, unless you write it just for your own amusement. Do you think that people will sell your stuff for free, no matter even if it is insanely great? If given the choice of your "killer" app which may be virus infested, or a clean "vetted by Apple" program, directly from Apple's servers, which with most people pay money for?

  • Re:Pertinent word... (Score:1, Interesting)

    by PNutts ( 199112 ) on Sunday March 16, 2008 @08:16PM (#22768920)
    Well, it's funny that Jobs likes to lecture the music and movie industry about the futility of DRM, but then he tries to lock down the iPhone.


    Well, one difference is that when your download "breaks", you can download it again or you are SOL (depending on the agreement you made when you downloaded it). A "broken" iPhone goes back to the store which starts a *very* expensive process (to AT&T and Apple). Hardware != Content. He just wants the goddam thing to work, which is why I bought the wifey a Mac instead of a PC. That's a revenue model I'm on board with.

  • Re:Pertinent word... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by moosesocks ( 264553 ) on Sunday March 16, 2008 @08:43PM (#22769062) Homepage

    Well, it's funny that Jobs likes to lecture the music and movie industry about the futility of DRM, but then he tries to lock down the iPhone.


    What is happening on the iPhone is not DRM. DRM is about copy-protection.

    There are many parallels between DRM and closed hardware platforms, but they are two very distinct issues.

    Apple's reasons for clamping down on the iPhone are very likely to be quite numerous, not to mention whatever sort of contractual obligations they have to fulfill with AT&T. It's not pretty, but it's how the mobile phone industry works in the US.

    I can understand people being disappointed that the iPhone is a closed and locked platform, but displaying outright anger over the issue is absurd. Nobody's forcing you to buy an iPhone, nor is anything preventing some bright entrepreneur from making something better.

  • Re:Pertinent word... (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 16, 2008 @08:52PM (#22769104)
    What's really funny is that everytime MS gets pwnt the story gets a 'haha' tag. When it's Apple it doesn't.

  • Re:Pertinent word... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by globaljustin ( 574257 ) on Sunday March 16, 2008 @09:23PM (#22769288) Journal

    worked technical support for several years. The worst part of the whole ordeal was dealing with all of the unpredictability on the other end.

    Saving money on doing tech. support has nothing to do with Apple's response to iphone hacks! Anyone who would have the capability to hack an iphone would know that if you hack it, you can't get support for it.

    Apple is concerned with money. More specifically, they got big bucks from AT&T to make it exclusive. AT&T have a vested interest to make sure that their investment is worth it. Apple has to prove to AT&T that all possible measures are being taken to ensure that if someone buys an iphone, they use AT&T service. That's what's in play here. Tech support is irrelevant.

    I bet Jobs personally at least sympathizes with those who want to hack iphones so they can use them with any phone services. The deal with AT&T may not have been his call in the end.

    off-topic, Parent post is a troll in disguise...basically he's ranting about frustrations of doing tech support and somehow managed to loosely connect it to the topic

  • Re:Pertinent word... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by nine-times ( 778537 ) <nine.times@gmail.com> on Sunday March 16, 2008 @09:24PM (#22769296) Homepage

    Any geek willing to break the seal is willing to forego support when they inevitably break the machine.

    Right. As an iPhone owner, I hacked mine a while back. It was really easy. Part of the problem, though, is that the OS has been changing often enough that most apps won't work unless they're written for the specific firmware you're using, so the payoff of hacking your phone is diminished. I think lots of developers stopped keeping up figuring they'd wait for the official SDK.

    Anyway, I don't doubt that the iPhone will keep getting hacked for as long as it's useful to hack it. I'm betting either Apple will be very reasonable about letting people distribute on iTunes, or else people will immediately hack a different distribution method for unauthorized apps. Either way you'll be able to get the apps you want with a minimum of hassle.

    It's going to happen, and the iPhone will be a cool platform. If Apple's smart (which they often show themselves to be) then they won't fight it.

  • Why doesn't Apple just release a Dev platform? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by SleepyHappyDoc ( 813919 ) on Sunday March 16, 2008 @10:26PM (#22769662)
    They could bring out something similar in specs, unlocked, able to run unsigned code, etc, all the capabilities the hacking community wants but sufficiently different in some way to distinguish it from the standard iphone (Bulkier, to add more connections, maybe?). Market it at a huge enough price difference that AT&T doesn't get upset, and everyone would be happy.

  • iPhone 2.0 Hardware...huh..what? VAPORWARE? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by PortHaven ( 242123 ) on Monday March 17, 2008 @08:38AM (#22772168) Homepage
    I mean, this post is talking about a hack on hardware that only exists internally to the Apple development cycle.

    Huh...

    Either, they hacked this themselves so as to determine how to protect against it. Or this whole story is hogwash and not worth two grains of salt.

Slashdot Top Deals

Happiness is twin floppies.

Close