Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

264 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Wow. (0, Troll)

phyrexianshaw.ca (1265320) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366598)

Well, I guess that shows that even though WE can install Ubuntu on a Mac, they have trouble with even that.

Re:Wow. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32366734)

Maybe their evaluation copy of Parallels Desktop has expired and they're waiting for the renewal or license key to hit their inbox.

Re:Wow. (4, Funny)

spazdor (902907) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367594)

I say we send them to boot camp.

Re:Wow. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32367260)

I think that this is just ridiculous and just more evidence that Linux users are nothing but criminals and thieves and open source should just be outlawed. It is this "free" software that engenders this attitude of laissez-faire we can do whatever we like without paying for anything that is the direct cause of security breaches such as this with the iPhone. The fact that open sores can continue to exist despite the hundreds of intellectual thefts in the form of Microsoft's patents, Fraunhofer Institutes patents with the mp3 players, Unix copyright thefts.

Don't you freetards get it? If you want something, you have to pay for it. And 100 dollars for something as great as an OS isn't that much. Look at the great things Bill Gates has done with his Windows money. Furthermore, you can't just steal it and expect to always get away. How are developers supposed to be paid? How is the US economy supposed to grow if its greatest companies like MS, Apple, SCO, Oracle, IBM, etc. are brought down by this communist freeware? If I had my way, you'd all be hunted down and put under the jail.

Re:Wow. (5, Funny)

VGPowerlord (621254) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367442)

It's OK, Steve. It's OK. No need to start throwing chairs here.

Re:Wow. (0)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367606)

Someone obviously didn't take their meds today...

Sounds like a feature (5, Insightful)

kthreadd (1558445) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366626)

So the problem is that the memory of the iPhone is mounted and that the data is exposed? I may not understand this exactly but hasn't the argument been for many years now that iPods couldn't be directly mounted like that?

Re:Sounds like a feature (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32366712)

I believe that under certain OS the iPod/iPhone/iEtc cannot mount as a regular external harddrive unless you format it correctly. However, Linux doesn't care and just mounts a harddrive as a harddrive instead of waiting for iTunes to open. I discovered this a few years when on vacation I plugged my iPod into my Ubuntu laptop (to charge) and discovered that I can easily access all the files stored on it.

Re:Sounds like a feature (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32366732)

iPods have always behaved as more or less standard USB mass storage devices. The music data has traditionally been in a pre-processed, slightly obfuscated form. In no way inaccessible by savvy users in hold of USB mass storage drivers.

Re:Sounds like a feature (5, Funny)

stagg (1606187) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366882)

Critical bug! Product too versatile -- works with non-Apple operating systems.

Re:Sounds like a feature (5, Informative)

marcansoft (727665) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366892)

They're not a block device, so you can't mount their filesystem as such. Instead, they're effectively network drives: the proprietary AFC file transfer protocol tunneled over a hugely mutilated version of TCP stuffed into USB packets. Which you can mount under Linux, using FUSE and the appropriate apps (usbmuxd, libimobiledevice, and ifuse). I maintain usbmuxd.

Apparently Apple relies on security through obscurity here (only their apps are usually able to talk to an iDevice), and the actual protocols aren't secured.

Incidentally, this is where the term "jailbreaking" comes from: breaking out of the AFC filesystem jail (which is usually limited to the user's data partition). Jailbreaking's original feature was to introduce a secondary AFC share with root privileges on the root directory, and jailbreaks to this day still do. You can use ifuse --root under Linux to mount this secondary share.

Re:Sounds like a feature (4, Interesting)

flooey (695860) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367130)

Which you can mount under Linux, using FUSE and the appropriate apps (usbmuxd, libimobiledevice, and ifuse). I maintain usbmuxd.

In fact, when you plug an iPhone into a Mac, you can see in the process list that usbmuxd is what Mac OS is using to talk to the device.

Re:Sounds like a feature (5, Informative)

marcansoft (727665) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367180)

Correct. I wrote most of the usbmuxd implementation that we use on Linux as a clone of Apple's version. In fact, you should (as of yesterday) be able to compile libusbmuxd and libimobiledevice and maybe even ifuse (with macFUSE?) and use them together with Apple's usbmuxd on OSX to pull off this hack there. Heck, I think at least libusbmuxd and libimobiledevice should even build on Windows these days (Apple provides a Windows version of usbmuxd with iTunes).

Re:Sounds like a feature (5, Interesting)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367148)

I have to wonder what sort of testing Apple(didn't) do here. If it is possible for a linux machine to mount the filesystem, then setting a PIN clearly has no effect at all on the device's access control of that filesystem. Even if plugged into a mac or PC running iTunes, the data should be equally accessible.

Either they simply didn't feel the need to make the PIN actually do much more than lock the screen(arguably fairly misleading), or next to no testing was done, or (even worse), setting the PIN also sets some sort of "politely ignore the data you could easily access" flag, that iTunes obeys and the third-party implementations don't.

Re:Sounds like a feature (1)

kent_eh (543303) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366942)

I'll have to try mine again.
When I tried to plug my iPhone in under Ubuntu 9.10, it caused a kernel panic. I suspected that may have been intentional on Apple's part.

Re:Sounds like a feature (1)

rxan (1424721) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366952)

But the PIN should prevent you from getting that far. Unless this part of the memory is meant to be unprotected.

Re:Sounds like a feature (1)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366976)

I think the problem is that the data is supposed to be protected. Sounds like you engage protection on the phone, but it doesn't actually protect the data. Now contrast this to a Blackberry, which uses strong encryption to protect its data when engaged. You can also directly mount a BB, but you can't get the data if the encryption is turned on (you can if it is off which is default).

This is a worry if your phone has some confidential information. You rely on putting protection on it, in case it gets stolen. However if it turns out the protection is for show only, that's a problem.

Re:Sounds like a feature (5, Informative)

marcansoft (727665) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367204)

The iPhone 3GS supposedly uses whole-disk encryption. This does squat when your USB comms protocol doesn't request authentication though, since you can pull the data off through the iPhone kernel's transparent decryption layer.

In other words, this hack has nothing to do with encryption and everything to do with an insecure protocol that makes no attempt to actually request PIN authentication before handing over all your data. Nobody expected your PIN to actually act as key for encryption anyway; that's impossible, as the iPhone has to be able to access your data even while locked.

Re:Sounds like a feature (1)

xgr3gx (1068984) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367316)

I don't think the PIN has anything to do with this. The PIN probably just locks the UI in the phone. That would be like pulling a hard drive out of one computer and adding to another and expecting the usernames and passwords to still work. You'll be able to mount the drive and access every part of the file system because the OS that governs access to that filesystem is not running. The drive is just being viewed by another computer.
If the filesystem was encrypted, I imagine you'd could still mount the drive, but the contents wouldn't be viewable.

Re:Sounds like a feature (1)

rthille (8526) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367396)

If the _filesystem_ is encrypted, then you can't mount it without the key. If the files are encrypted, then you can't make sense of their contents without the key(s).

Re:Sounds like a feature (1)

Tekfactory (937086) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367628)

On many phones the PIN or keycode just unlocks the keypad, or in a touchscreen's case the UI. This does diddly to stop the USB connected phone's memory from being used as a storage device.

The primary function of the "security" code here is to keep you from butt/pocket/purse dialing unintenationally. The Security code is not to lock down the confidential info on the phone and keep folks from copying all your data.

Re:Sounds like a feature (5, Funny)

greatica (1586137) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367192)

Breaking into an Apple device: "it just works."

Re:Sounds like a feature (1)

DarkOx (621550) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367320)

And when it was a music player that was a resonable argument to make. Why should you not have an easy way to copy files to a and from it. The data is not unique or personal.. I would still make the argument they should be mountable and apparently Apple agrees. What I find entertaing is that they don't have some sort of encrypted storage; where apps can write possibly private info into. A registry or something that is protected; even in the volume itself is open.

Re:Sounds like a feature (0, Offtopic)

monkeyboythom (796957) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367624)

heh heh you said "mount"

Re:Sounds like a feature (1)

icebike (68054) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367654)

Seems not to do this on my older iPhone 3G.

All it sees is the camera via digicam.

So he either has some additional libraries on his Ubuntu or some hack-ness on his phone, or this bug was introduced on the 3Gs model.

Re:Sounds like a feature (1)

BlueBoxSW.com (745855) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367686)

You don't understand. It's a problem because can't say it is a "Walled Garden", they now will have to say "It's a walled garden. Unless you use open tools. Then it's kind of open. But Now we want better tools to do with it as we please, and Apple doesn't seem to be developing these on their dime and giving them away for free. Curses!"

Who says... (1)

Thelasko (1196535) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366638)

Linux is hard to use?

Re:Who says... (3, Informative)

Lord Lode (1290856) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366684)

Apparently it's so hard to use that they can't even reproduce it at Apple.

Re:Who says... (-1, Troll)

Mordok-DestroyerOfWo (1000167) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366788)

Let's be realistic here. At Apple any mouse with more than one button, or any phone with more than one button is considered "hard to use".

Re:Who says... (2, Informative)

Amarantine (1100187) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366852)

That joke is getting a bit old, with Apple selling 4-button mice with every iMac for 5 years now.

Re:Who says... (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32367240)

Wah wah wah, we hurt the poor widdle mac loser's feelings? Too bad.
Get the fuck off my internet and don't come back until you're smart enough to use a REAL computer.
Anyone stupid enough to buy a Mac deserves endless teasing and harassment from his superiors.

Re:Who says... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32367112)

That 10 year old joke would be a titch funnier if OSX wasn't built on Unix.

Re:Who says... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32366808)

Apparently it's so hard to use that they can't even reproduce it at Apple.

What do you expect from folks who use Macs? If it is anything other than graphic design... well good luck with that.

Re:Who says... (1)

rednip (186217) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367286)

Who says... Linux is hard to use?

Lots of people do, they're wrong of course, but somehow that doesn't seem to stop them from saying it.

Hard drive (0)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366644)

Pin or no pin, couldn't you just pull the hard drive out of the phone and plug it into a computer? I doubt it has any type of encryption.

Re:Hard drive (2, Informative)

f8l_0e (775982) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366688)

All of its storage is flash memory soldered to the logic board. There is no way to remove the storage.

Re:Hard drive (1)

ground.zero.612 (1563557) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366768)

All of its storage is flash memory soldered to the logic board. There is no way to remove the storage.

You must be speaking as a person with literally no experience with electronics.

I've lost count of all the chips I've desoldered and resoldered over the years...

Re:Hard drive (3, Informative)

f8l_0e (775982) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367504)

Except I believe that the memory on the iPhone is composed of ball grid array chips. So then it becomes an issue of using a reflow gun or oven. Then, once you have removed those, you need to reball the chips or have a bga prototyping socket and then attach it a compatible controller chip. Then unless you have done this to all of the chips to dump their contents so you have a complete filesystem, or all you have is useless bits. So, while not impossible, it is not a 30 second procedure like hooking up a hard drive.

Re:Hard drive (1)

_KiTA_ (241027) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366792)

All of its storage is flash memory soldered to the logic board. There is no way to remove the storage.

Except with a soldering iron. And I imagine it's fairly standard flash memory at that.

Or am I missing something? Would doing that wipe the flash?

Re:Hard drive (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32366888)

Would doing that wipe the flash?

It will if you use the Apple-standard soldering iron. Anything else is unsupported.

Re:Hard drive (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366972)

Indeed, and the next update will cause the entire unit to melt if mods are not done with the iSolderingIron.

Re:Hard drive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32367454)

Indeed, and the next update will cause the entire unit to melt if mods are not done with the iSolderingIron.

Ha, more like the i... erm... the SolderingiRon, I guess.

That... that joke sort of went off the rails there, I'll try again later...

Re:Hard drive (1)

omglolbah (731566) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366920)

It is standard flash memory. Desoldering and reading the data is not hard at all.
I think making sense of the raw data is more of a challenge than then desoldering and reading.

Re:Hard drive (1)

t0qer (230538) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366822)

All of its storage is flash memory soldered to the logic board.

Give me a solder sucker, a USB keydrive with a compatible flash chip controller, and I'll have it removed. Just because it's soldered on doesn't mean it's impossible to transfer the flash to something else, plug it in, and read it.

Re:Hard drive (1)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366848)

No safe, practical way. You can always cut it out, but soldering it back in may present issues.

Re:Hard drive (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366874)

No way for a casual attacker to do so. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to remove the chips, which are a well-understood commodity item, and talk to them directly.

Depending on exactly how bad-block information and the like are stored, they may run into some trouble there; but only proper data encryption would actually stop them.

Re:Hard drive (1)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367296)

rocket surgeons? Do they operate on explosives or fuel?

Re:Hard drive (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32367494)

You misunderstand, rocket surgeons operate with explosives..

Re:Hard drive (1)

CoffeeDog (1774202) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367284)

You don't even need to remove it from the board, just connect up some leads to the pins and you can read it without leaving a single scratch. That's what my solder-less Wii mod chip does, it's a socket that fits right over the chip and has contacts that touch the pins.

Ubuntu feature == exploit? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32366650)

Nobody bothered to check whether Ubuntu tries a couple of obvious/common PINs first? Really?

Protip: IT DOES.

Re:Ubuntu feature == exploit? (1)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366698)

Hey, 1 2 3 4 might be obvious to you, but it wasn't for me!

Re:Ubuntu feature == exploit? (1)

just_another_sean (919159) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366718)

[citation needed]

So this is one of those "Hey, that's the combination on my luggage" things?

Re:Ubuntu feature == exploit? (1)

Steve Max (1235710) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367238)

If you try three wrong PINs, your SIM card is locked; so probably they don't do this. Unless, of course, people are using PIN for something entirely different from what PIN means when discussing GSM phones.

Absurf (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32366670)

Don't be ridiculous. It'll be jailbroken.

Updated story (4, Informative)

OzPeter (195038) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366692)

From TFA Apple could reproduce the described serious issue and believes to understand why this can happen but cannot provide timing or further details on the release of a fix.

Re:Updated story (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32366838)

New headline:

Ubuntu still working as intended, Apple promises Fix...

Re:Updated story (1)

lennier1 (264730) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366934)

Sadly it's not that unlikely.

Re:Updated story (1)

MozeeToby (1163751) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366900)

Shouldn't it just be a matter of requiring the user to allow the mount of the iPhone side? That is, I believe, how Android handles the problem. Nothing can be mounted until the user tells the phone to allow it, which must be done from the home screen, which cannot be accessed without the sign in pattern. Unless that is how it is supposed to work but for whatever reason isn't happening on Lucid Lynx?

Maybe that all apple policy was a poor idea (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32366694)

You are liable to be fired if you bring in non-apple hardware or a non-apple operating system to work at apple.

Apple can now reproduce (4, Informative)

KnownIssues (1612961) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366702)

Bernd Marienfeldt updated his blog saying Apple is now able to reproduce the problem and believes they know the cause, but no timing on fix release.

Attention Naysayers (1)

swanzilla (1458281) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366736)

Let us Ubuntu fanboiz have a moment to gloat before trashing our OS as a whole.

Thanks.

Re:Attention Naysayers (4, Funny)

egcagrac0 (1410377) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366802)

You two have fun with that.

Re:Attention Naysayers (1)

stagg (1606187) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366840)

Do we have to like Ubuntu 10.04 or can Linux fans in general gloat?

Re:Attention Naysayers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32367526)

Do we have to like Ubuntu 10.04 or can Linux fans in general gloat?

Gloat away.

Re:Attention Naysayers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32367662)

Get real.

- Debian

Physical Access = Root Access (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32366760)

Suprised and shocked, really???

Just because you have a smartphone, doesn't mean it encrypts your super secret data. You normally have to pay extra for something like that. However, I think it would be cool if Apple incorporated encryption as a setting into the new release of iPhone OS.

This is not Apple's problem. (5, Funny)

gimmebeer (1648629) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366796)

It is a security problem with Ubuntu and should be fixed by their dev team before they are sued for hacking. Afterall, the iPhone was not meant to be connected to anything other than Apple software.

Re:This is not Apple's problem. (1)

lennier1 (264730) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366878)

Expect the decree from His Holy Steveness within a week.

Re:This is not Apple's problem. (1)

egcagrac0 (1410377) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366912)

It's the user's problem, because an attacker won't feel any particular compulsion to be bound by Apple's intents and guidelines.

It's Apple's problem if they want their users to trust that Apple has their best interests in mind.

Sorry I have to point out (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32367274)

Woooosh!

Re:This is not Apple's problem. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32367004)

Actually it's an Apple problem since they did not borther to encrypt the volume.

Re:This is not Apple's problem. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32367102)

You make it sound like security through obscurity is a bad thing.

Re:This is not Apple's problem. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32367200)

According to security experts yes...

according to His Holy Emperor Steve Jobs? security through obscurity is the best thing.

Apple vs Linux (1, Funny)

stagg (1606187) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366806)

Clearly Ubuntu is some kind of crazy hacker operating system, and Apple should block their products from working with it.

Re:Apple vs Linux (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367010)

They tried!

It is too strong.

Re:Apple vs Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32367060)

Use... the force!!!

And? (5, Insightful)

lennier1 (264730) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366830)

Will their fix consist of actually making the device more secure or will they just try to make it harder use it with Linux systems?

not too surprised (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32366836)

This was the same thing that happened back in the day with the ipod. You plug it into anything other then a mac, and it shows up as a hard drive. All you had to do was unhide anything that was hidden and you get access to everything. I think the touch got around this by making it show up as a camera, but that was easily circumvented. This really isn't that much of a surprise.

iTunes (1)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366914)

Wait a sec... if I plug in my phone, iTunes automatically makes a backup of everything on it.

This backup doesn't require a PIN either!

Re:iTunes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32367208)

The question though, is the data in that backup accessable?

I can back up an encrypted file easily but all I have is encrypted data in the end. Doesn't help any if you can't make use of it.

(As I lack both iTunes and a phone that takes advantage of it, I'm simply speaking in hypothetical. No practical experience with your setup.)

Re:iTunes (2, Interesting)

shagie (1803508) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367690)

On iTunes the 'Summary' tab has a set of options. One of them reads 'Encrypt iPhone backup' as a checkmark. Poking about my system (~/Library/Application Support/MobileSync/Backup/...) I can find some of the raw data that on my phone there (settings, files). So, it is possible to encrypt that data as the backup is stored but it sounds like that the unencrypted data is what iTunes accesses.

PIN != content access control (3, Insightful)

Steve Max (1235710) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366938)

The GSM standard defines a PIN as an access number for your SIM card. It has nothing to do with your phone's contents. Most phones allow you to set up a security key, which is needed either to turn on the phone every time (even if you have your SIM set up not to need a PIN), or when you change the SIM.

I don't know if this is actually the same PIN defined by the GSM standard or if it's another, Apple-specific key; but when you're talking about phones, PIN is connected to the SIM, or to the phone line, not to the phone contents.

Re:PIN != content access control (1)

CoffeeDog (1774202) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367518)

They're talking about the 4 digit security code/password/PIN that you have to punch in to the iPhone to unlock it. If you have a 3GS with an unlock password set and you hook it up to iTunes and try to sync it while it's at the lock sceen, you'll be met with an error that you must unlock the phone first. This is so if your phone is locked someone can't just nab it and hook up a USB cable and sync it to their iTunes to grab your info off it. Ubuntu doesn't have any problem accessing the phone though even if it is at the lock screen with the password set.

No shit, Sherlock (1, Insightful)

whterbt (211035) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366954)

Seriously, people are shocked by this? Did anyone actually think entering a PIN was encrypting the device? Who told you that it would?

This was a feature intended to keep your jerkwad friends from picking up your phone and prank-texting your boss or girlfriend. Nothing more.

Helpful hint to all those who were fooled by this: those "fingerprint scanner" apps in the App Store aren't real, either.

Re:No shit, Sherlock (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32367008)

They're not!? Crap, I've been using them for a long time now! I hope no one stole anything!

RTFA.. (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32367028)

From Apple:

Apple iPhone Security Overview [1]:

Data Protection:

Protecting data stored on iPhone is important for any environment with a high level of sensitive corporate or customer information. In addition to encrypting data in trans-mission, iPhone 3GS provides hardware encryption for data stored on the device.

Encryption:

iPhone 3GS offers hardware-based encryption. iPhone 3GS hardware encryption uses AES 256 bit encoding to protect all data on the device. Encryption is always enabled, and cannot be disabled by users.

Re:RTFA.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32367650)

Except when plugged into a standard usb port using the cable that came with the device. doh!

So? (-1)

Weezul (52464) | more than 4 years ago | (#32366994)

iPhones are not designed for business users, hello, virtual keyboard. So I doubt we'll see many iPhone users with data so confidential they need encryption.

Re:So? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32367678)

You would be surprised of how many PHBs are giving up their Blackberries for iPhones. This is why Apple has gone out of their way to provide not just basic Exchange support [1], but being able to support policies from Active Directory and enforce those on the phone.

[1]: Technically, since Exchange supports POP and IMAP, any client along those lines is good enough.

Attempted to duplicate - not quite what they say (4, Informative)

Zorkon (121860) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367006)

I plugged my iPhone 3GS into my Ubuntu box. While it's true that Ubuntu did automount the iPhone, the only thing I can find that was exposed was my music, photos and podcasts.

I wasn't able to access email, contact info, or anything else on the phone. I did see the Application Archives, PublicStaging, Purchases, and Safari folders but they're empty. I have lots of email and contact info on the device - but it appears to be inaccessible via this method.

Re:Attempted to duplicate - not quite what they sa (1)

aaarrrgggh (9205) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367682)

...and these things need to be accessible without PIN for compatibility with third party devices. Sounds like Apple just needs to clarify that iPod functions are not encrypted... or offer an option to encrypt them.

Wonder if remote wipe kills this content as well?

PIN can't encrypt (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32367050)

If they made the PIN encrypt the data it would break every existing iPod-ready music player.

Apple has become a parody of itself. (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367106)

This is just too funny.

The latest release of iTunes crashes in my XP VM.

The latest Ubuntu can read an iPhone like a regular iPod again.

So my Ubuntu VM is a better environment for dealing with my iPhone than my XP VM is.

What a hoot.

So in other words... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32367108)

...Ubuntu is a DRM hacking tool for terrorists? I told you the Linux was anti-American!!!!!

Better not fix it. (1)

ebbomega (410207) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367246)

Not being able to talk with Linux is one of the things that has kept me off iPods for years. I finally liked the features of the iPod touch and buckled, and used it in Virtualbox under windows/iTunes (so I didn't have to jailbreak it).

Now, finally, Rhythmbox can seamlessly put music on my iPod. If they take that functionality away, then that oft-publicized letter that Jobs put forth touting open standards as an excuse for not supporting Flash is going to be exposed as pure and utter hogwash.

Bad Bad Apple (1)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367280)

Seriously, they don't encrypt the content of an iPhone by default? I mean, it's not the default on Blackberry, but it's there and Blackberry have been around for a long time. When making a new device, why not build encryption into the filesystem? Apple has all the components already from their desktop and it can't suck that much battery. Now Apple is offering encryption just for e-mail? Really, that isn't good enough. And while I'm at it, Google what's up with you doing the same bloody thing? Come on guys. It's 2010. Encryption should be there by default so if your phone is stolen the data is useless, especially if you're going to offer a remote wipe. Wiping just the keys is a lot faster than hoping they don't turn it off while you wipe the whole drive.

Already fixed in iPhone OS 4.0 (5, Interesting)

bic2k (140221) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367300)

Ya, one of the new features in iPhone OS 4.0 is "Data Protection". Specified files for applications are on the fly encrypted and decrypted. The phone has to be unlocked (valid pin entered) to access the data.

Seems like they already handled this issue, unless someone wants to test that on an iPhone with 4.0 running on it...

If this was a Sony phone, instad of an Apple one, (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32367460)

...surely we could expect a firmware update that removes the offending OS?
(I'll leave it to your imagination if that would mean blanking the phone or blanking the Ubuntu Linux computer the phone is attached to)

Captcha: pursed - one of the two states of a female-owned iPhone

And the problem is...? (0, Redundant)

mikenevans (1771944) | more than 4 years ago | (#32367580)

I plugged my Windows hard-drive into my Ubuntu box and **surprise** "it was automounted with all of the Windows data exposed." I guess there's no security in Windows either? Hmmm, then I did it with an Ubuntu drive on another Ubuntu machine and it's data was exposed too! The truth is that there's no real security in any device when you have physical access to it unless *all* data is encrypted, which I have yet to find ANY operating system that does that.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>