Hacker News Reader

Comment by isodev | Hacker News Reader

I can’t fully grasp the argument about jail breaking. The device was never intended to be used this way in the first place. The process itself probably also relies on bugs that need to be reported, not harnessed.

I own my device without the need to root it, every feature in the brochure is available to me as a user.

I understand that around the 90s owning anything with an OS also implied the ability to mess with the box of bolts and circuits that run the OS but that’s no longer the case. At least not when it comes to phones.

I mean sure maybe you want a fancy device to play with … get a PCB and do whatever you want with it while your phone is updating.

View on HN

>The device was never intended to be used this way in the first place.

The manufacturer has no say on the usage, simple as that. That there are better ways to tinker is irrelevant. It doesn't preclude the right of people to tinker with anything they own at their own convenience, including an iPhone if that's what they got.

You are absolutely right. The manufacturer and the law has no say on the usage of a device I own. And still I cannot expect them to support a way of usage that was never intended. So Apple shouldn't be (and isn't) able to sue jailbreakers, but they don't have to make it easy for them.

Apple’s security theater is the pillar of their anticompetitive behaviors. The only users it helps are noobs who will just install whatever. If some serious actor wants your data, the theater doesn’t deter them, as evidenced by this Pegasus. If China wants your data, Apple will hand it over themselves.

It’s all a “think of the children” race-to-the-bottum where rent-seekers abuse fear and sycophanty to monopolize critical infrastructure.

Targeted attacks from nation states aren't in the average person's threat model, though it's definitely one Apple tries (and fails) to tackle.

But Apple's security measures definitely help against virtually anything else. Over-zealous police and border patrol. Script kiddies. General spyware and malware.

I think you're forgetting how bad mobile security was before both Apple and Google started adding these hardening measures to their flagship devices. You really couldn't trust your phone at all. Now, you somewhat can.

You're free to tinker with an iPhone however you want, it just might require you to be smart enough to work around the built-in security measures.

You're free to tinker with your John Deere equipment however you want, it just might require you to be smart enough to work around the built-in security measures.

I mean, yes? The OS not being locked down is a feature, like the ring tone being changeable. If you want that feature, buy a phone/tractor with that feature.

I’m not disputing the right to do whatever you want with your phone.

My comment was specifically targeting the fact that jail breaking somehow encourages people to develop means of circumventing the security of devices. This is when this becomes dangerous - suddenly it has the potential to hurt unsuspecting users. Saying that the responsibility is with Apple (or Google) to make this possible feels like a straw man argument - their job is to earn money (no illusions there) and keep users safe, even if it means making it harder to tinker (which also helps them earn money)

That's why we need changes to the law.

>The manufacturer has no say on the usage, simple as that.

Where does this end? Should all devices that have computers attached be capable of being 'rooted'?

You would not have the expectation if for example you purchased an MRI machine, that it should be able to emulate a Game Boy. A phone is also a special purpose computer; and the phone's software is designed to guarantee that those special purposes always work.

In my opinion this is the main thing that this root crowd does not understand; the iPhone is not a general purpose computing device. You should not have bought one if that's what you wanted. The market is full of general purpose computers that can make phone calls.

Arbitrary separating the hardware from the OS is not the same thing as the manufacturer having a say on usage. Like I am free to use my car how I want, but that I may not be able to easily repair it or swap parts like the seats or the engine is another problem.

I feel like Jailbreaking was much more of a thing about 10-12 years ago when the iPhone 3G/3GS and 4 came out. Around that time iOS was still pretty limited in what you could do . So Jailbreaking gave you the ability to:

- Set a background wallpaper - Reply to SMS in a quick reply window (I still miss BiteSMS) - Create albums in Photos. - An "Android Like" (back then) quick toggle.

Nowdays all these features and more are part of iOS, but back then Jailbreaking let you do so many things that Apple hadn't gotten around to including in iOS.

> Around that time iOS was still pretty limited in what you could do

I'd argue it still is.

I can't install a third party web browser that doesn't use WebKit.

I can't select alternative default apps to most apps bundled with the OS.

I still can't unlock the bootloader.

I still can't browse the entire filesystem.

People who espouse the virtues of jailbreaking on iOS tend to forget one big thing... the exploits that are used to jailbreak are also exploits used by malware creators to compromise the system.

The difference between then and now is that back then, the limitations impacted the average user. “Normal” users were interested in jailbreaking because it meant they could get access to still relatively basic apps by today’s standards.

The items you just listed matter only to people like the posters here. We have philosophical differences with the limitations in place today, but back in the heyday, those limitations were just fundamental gaps in functionality available to users.

With the many major new APIs available to devs over the years and with the maturation of the App Store, those original drivers behind jailbreaking just aren’t there for the most part.

Most of my average iPhone using friends have an issue with the filesystem being opaque relatively frequently.

Most of my friends don’t even know what a file system is, so I’d say having opinions about it puts them above average.

In my case, the iPhone users around me bump into barriers that wouldn't be there if iOS didn't keep all data in inaccessible silos, but they don't see them as such. For example, someone wanted to back up all their iMessage conversations, including photos. This turned out to be a pain precisely because I couldn't just copy an "all iMessage data" folder like I could on macOS, but they didn't attribute it to the lack of filesystem access. To them (and most users presumably), it was just a problem of "why doesn't the iPhone let me back up iMessage to my computer easily?".

Does the local backup with iTunes not include iMessage?

I don't know too may users who care only about a specific aspect of their phone when backing up. I do have non-technical friends who do iTunes/local backups because they "don't trust the cloud", but I've never encountered a person trying to do this piecemeal.

For what it's worth, there are decent 3rd party tools like iMazing that are easy to use and do give you more granular control.

The primary point of jailbreaking is to be able to run native apps not approved by or banned by Apple and that is something you still cannot do.

Yes, it’s very unfortunate when an app is not available for some reason.

In most cases it’s a valid reason - the app is malicious, poorly made or somehow in conflict with local law. Also imagine if you are an app developer an suddenly your project (on which you’ve spent countless hours of hard work) is unexpectedly leaked as freely available for download and side-loading. I’m not talking big Corps like epic and blizzard … but people like you and me.

Open source apps can be loaded easily, so developers who really want to make their stuff available can still do so and users won’t need to hack their phones to get such apps. But of course this can’t happen en masse.

The affect of piracy is generally overstated and commonly bundled with the (incorrect) belief that a pirate would instead be a paying customer if the piracy option was not available.

The Steam model appears to be way better. I am buying 10x more things on Steam than I will ever have time to use, while I generally avoid Appstore as much as possible for Mac apps (and even for phone apps when there is an alternative) The psychology of the Steam store is very different from the Appstore.

while I generally avoid Appstore as much as possible for Mac apps

Interesting, I do the opposite. When something is available in the Mac App Store or through other means, I will generally buy it in the App Store. Why? Application sandboxing is mandatory for Mac App Store apps and I strongly prefer that applications are sandboxed by default.

The second, less important, reason is that I can just install the applications with just one click and don't have to download them from different places, look up their serial numbers, etc.

Agreed. I‘ve even rebought some apps on the App Store just for the security and convenience.

That said, I‘m struggling with the constraints Apple puts on the business models of developers, for example when it comes to upgrade pricing. While I have a fair amount of software Mac/iOS subscriptions running (8 by my current count) there‘s definitely software I passed on because it moved to a subscription model.

> that is something you still cannot do

Factually wrong. You can run apps on iOS without jailbreaking that weren’t approved by Apple, or even ones banned by Apple. This has been true for years. Yes, the required resigning of the app every seven days is a major hindrance, but it is still something you very much CAN do.

A temporary cert only able to be created on another Apple system is not what I would say is an 'allowing' of running third party apps.

It is a kludge designed to make the process as unpleasant as possible but just so enough that Apple can claim they don't block sideloading.

It's disingenuous.

> A temporary cert only able to be created on another Apple system

You don’t need an Apple system to codesign. Two results on first page of search results:

https://github.com/zhlynn/zsign

https://weisser-zwerg.dev/posts/ios-app-without-mac/

> make the process as unpleasant as possible but just so enough that Apple can claim they don't block sideloading

Apple doesn’t claim they don’t block side-loading. Actually I believe they claim the opposite in the Epic case (even though it is possible via a supported process) because it was “necessary to ensure the safety of their user base” or something like that.

> It's disingenuous

Shifting goal posts from “you can’t” to “you can’t without X” once someone points out the first was factually incorrect is considered disingenuous by many too.

(Edit for formatting and provide links)

> Shifting goal posts from “you can’t” to “you can’t without X” once someone points out the first was factually incorrect is considered disingenuous by many too.

First off, you're making a huge assumption here.

Second, the only goalpost shifting here is your attempt to pass off complex and temporary workarounds intended for developers as resulting in a device that is somehow the same as jailbroken devices. This is incorrect for the obvious reasons pointed out already.

Perhaps you are unfamiliar with jailbreak and didn't know apps installed via jailbreak don't need to be constantly renewed and resigned? Installing apps long term is still something you can't do, as I originally said.

Attempting to pass off a lesser solution that doesn't come close to matching what I originally mentioned and pretending it is the same is dishonest and disingenuous.

That's true but becoming a developer is outside what's being discussed here. Non-developers jailbreak too. Let alone the extra expense and equipment besides the phone itself you're going to need.

> That's true but becoming a developer is outside what's being discussed here.

Pure anecdata, but the vast majority of folks I see talking about AltStore outside HN are not developers. YMMV!

As unpopular as I think this opinion is, I can't help but agree. If you want a hackable phone there are literally thousands of different Android phones that you can buy for a fraction of the price that you can tweak/hack to your heart's content.

But none work with Apple Watches, nor do they work with iMessage.

There’s a saying about cake that seems to apply here.

Again, there are other options for both. Android wear devices are still a thing, and there are multiple options that aren’t SMS that are available to the Android ecosystem.

If you want to live in the Apple ecosystem, that comes with some tradeoffs. Can’t have it both ways.

Actually, there isn't. It's perfectly possible to be able to have a process to request bootloader unlocks from Apple, and also be able to use the ecosystem.

The entire point of the saying that you can't have your cake and eat it too is that, well, it can't be both in your hands and in your stomach. But it's perfectly possible for me to be able to call Apple and get a bootloader unlock code, without any other change to anything.

The general point behind the proverb boils down to "you can't have it both ways" or "you can't have the best of two worlds".

That's essentially what the parent comment is trying to do. When offered the Android ecosystem as an alternative, the counterpoint was to lament the lack of Apple Watch and iMessage support in the Android ecosystem.

This is textbook "I want it both ways".

While it's literally impossible to have cake and to have eaten it, it's not impossible to have a good phone and a hackable one, in a single device.

The cake thing was in response to you wanting Apple Watch and iMessage…on Android.

This is the definition of wanting it both ways.

I don’t think anyone would argue that it’s technically impossible, but that should not be mistaken with “practically impossible” given Apple’s business model.

I don't want iMessage on Android, I want a hackable phone that supports iMessage too. I realize that's not really possible now, but it's not a logical impossibility, like being alive and dead at the same time.

The key difference is with Android you can take responsibility for your own security if you choose; it's a Linux not so different to any other.

On iPhone you don't have that option, and you have no way of knowing if your phone was compromised.

> I own my device without the need to root it, every feature in the brochure is available to me as a user.

I'm not able to sideload iOS apps easily (apart from using AltStore), or downgrade apps at all. This becomes possible with a jailbreak.

Also, with a jailbreak, I own my data. iOS (Android too, I believe) actively prevents some data from being backed up or copied otherwise.

> Also, with a jailbreak, I own my data. iOS (Android too, I believe) actively prevents some data from being backed up or copied otherwise.

The primary area you see this is with applications which have flagged that data as sensitive so it won't be included on unecrypted backups (which includes iCloud). This is somewhat important for security — for example, you reasonably do not want TOTP seeds floating around invalidating your second factor security model — but it means you have a problem if an application you care about uses that feature in a way you don't anticipate.

> Also, with a jailbreak, I own my data.

Also with a jailbreak, other people own your data too. A jailbreak is an exploit. A hammer can be used to drive in a nail (jailbreak) or it can be used to smash windows (malware.) Same tool in the end.

The very act of jailbreaking is what keeps your system vulnerable to the same exploits used by malicious actors.

So get another phone.

How does this let you sideload iOS apps, or run older versions of them? That's like responding “just use Linux“ to a Windows user's complaint about Office.

Sideloading apps is not a feature of iOS. It is also illegal unless the app explicitly allows it in their license. If you need to be able to side load apps, you need a device intended for this purpose.

Regarding data, all user data on iOS is backed up either through iCloud and/or on your Mac.

Well, some people want to have root access to study iOS internals, debug software, look for forensic artefacts and unknown vulnerabilities.

> I understand that around the 90s owning anything with an OS also implied the ability to mess with the box of bolts and circuits that run the OS but that’s no longer the case. At least not when it comes to phones.

Incorrect. It is still the case with nearly all Android phones. You can install any OS version, gain full permissions, mess with kernels, modules, frameworks, recoveries, ...

You mean all of the people I see complaining about locked bootloaders are mistaken?

Thats because they bought a locked version, such as most carrier models.

I use my device to scratch my nose who is anyone to tell me how to use my device after I purchase it? A jailbroken iPhone has been useful in so many ways over the years. Currently I am not jailbroken but wish I was just to see all the cool mods I could have access too. There are so many useful tools it blew my mind all the missing features Apple left out. Hell when I bought the phone Rogers sold me a video messaging plan. Sure was surprised to learn the original iPhone didn’t even have native video recording. I was however able to jailbreak and download Cycorder and suddenly I could use my device not as it was intended I guess but super useful to me. Your point of view seems so narrow minded to me.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com