Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Secret URL Allows Apple to Delete Your iPhone Apps Remotely
blog.wired.com — It's supposed to be your "life in your pocket," not Apple's. But a piece of code discovered in the iPhone operating system might keep you under Apple's control.
zaibatsu- 1344 diggs
- digg it
- RaspberryTang, on 08/07/2008, -18/+35Better Title: Big Brother hits Apple!
- estvir, on 08/08/2008, -3/+22You make it sound as if this is something new to Apple. I'm not surprised at all at this news.
- expert01, on 08/08/2008, -3/+1This can't delete apps from a specific phone, just all of them. What if an app had a really nasty bug that crashed your phone? Isn't that something apple should have deleted?
- spoonchucks, on 08/08/2008, -0/+1expert01: No.
Now go change your name.
- BlackCow, on 08/08/2008, -0/+14Kind of seems like... 1984?
- shakin, on 08/08/2008, -11/+3Have you even read 1984?
- BobMysterioso, on 08/08/2008, -0/+16Moron, its a reference to Apple's 1984 commercial.
- LR2_, on 08/08/2008, -1/+7http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYecfV3ubP8
- BurgerPunch, on 08/08/2008, -13/+0Better Title: Retarded loser manages to make the first post in Digg story
- rromansanturio, on 08/08/2008, -0/+5fanboy...
- jabberwolf, on 08/08/2008, -4/+13Apple has always been a control freek.
For most mactards they love what apple gives them because they are told to.
Now that more than mactards use the iphone, people see the control Apple wants over everything, every app., and every revenue stream.- intellimouse, on 08/08/2008, -6/+4When Steve Jobs dies (hopefully soon), maybe they'll loosen up a bit.
- chrislee149, on 08/08/2008, -1/+1A male elder sibling punches a fruit?
- se1zure, on 08/08/2008, -2/+3Honestly this seems like more of a security measure. If Apple finds out that a certain app contains malicious code then it is best for everyone to have it turned off. What if your phone is lost and you have the ebay app or something on there and logged on. It would be useful if apple could uninstall it over the network.
- wh3873, on 08/08/2008, -3/+2You have got to be kidding me. Sure that could be one use but it seems far more likely they'd use it to delete non approved apps. The basic idea of ownership is that once you buy something you control how it's used, unless you are hurting other people. This would be like Ford putting a chip in your car that could shut it down remotely. That would be useful if your car got stolen, but would you be happy knowing you didn't control your car?
- toetagger, on 08/09/2008, -0/+1http://digg.com/apple/Fixing_Poor_Journalism_iPhon ... From the original whistle blower who discovered this...
- estvir, on 08/08/2008, -3/+22You make it sound as if this is something new to Apple. I'm not surprised at all at this news.
- str3ama, on 08/07/2008, -9/+132Dugg to see what happens - will Digger's hate for under-handed sneakiness from Companies beat out Apple fanboyism? Will someone come up with a long and diluted explanation for why Apple doing this should not be seen as a threat?
- megamod, on 08/07/2008, -9/+54no! Apple is a great company. they just did this because they're so great. If there's an app that is acting like a virus they can uninstall it before it causes any harm...
*this is the point where you fall asleep*
... AND THAT'S WHY APPLE IS THE MEANING OF LIFE!!!- Theli, on 08/08/2008, -1/+3Please!
This is obviously AT&T's fault. First the music companies force Apple to use DRM that only plays on Apple software/hardware, now a mobile carrier forces Apple to implement measures that could remotely disable your legally purchased software.
/sarcasm (for those who are a bit slow)
- Theli, on 08/08/2008, -1/+3Please!
- adml_shake, on 08/08/2008, -5/+34This was on the front page a while ago already, and most of the iFanboys were rushing to apples defense.
- blorc, on 08/08/2008, -8/+2Kind of like how Microsoft fanboys/Apple haters are rushing to conclusions about what this URL *might* signify?
Seriously, iFanboys? That's about as bad as saying M$. It makes you look more biased than the people you're attempting to label biased. - stuffradio, on 08/08/2008, -3/+2M$ doesn't think so...
/Linux and M$ (Vista ftw) fanboy
Might want to digg me down, then digg me up for saying Linux...
- blorc, on 08/08/2008, -8/+2Kind of like how Microsoft fanboys/Apple haters are rushing to conclusions about what this URL *might* signify?
- pilot3033, on 08/08/2008, -31/+3It's been discussed on digg before, I think it's rather a nifty feature if you ask me. Should an app with malintent accidently make it on to the app store and then onto a phone, apple can remove the app remotely.
*iPHONE GETS VIRUS!*
Apple is able to quickly remove all infected iphones of app before any major damage was done
vs.
*VIRUS HITS IPHONE!*
Millions of phones affected and identities stolen, stock plummets and customers wonder why Apple has been slow to respond.- bjornski, on 08/08/2008, -9/+69But if Microsoft did this, it would be horrible and evil.
You guys are funny. - saranagati, on 08/08/2008, -4/+10You obviously don't know much about viruses.
- MrTito, on 08/08/2008, -1/+9Addressing your argument...
Maybe Apple should use more scrutiny at the app store level then...? If they're controlling the distribution channel from end-to-end (which they are) then it's their fault that a malicious app made it to a user's phone, period. They don't need a "nifty feature" on your phone to undo damage - they need more vigilance to make sure it doesn't enter their channel in the first place. - kushalone, on 08/08/2008, -0/+1MrTito, exactly. They are trying to save their collective butts if something passes their scrutiny.
- bjornski, on 08/08/2008, -9/+69But if Microsoft did this, it would be horrible and evil.
- sononame, on 08/08/2008, -1/+8I'm guessing they could make more money by renting some apps instead of selling them out right.
- Me1000, on 08/08/2008, -14/+5for a second lets just assume this app will disable any app they want on the iPhone (because all we can do is assume, since we dont know)
So what if an App begins transmitting your whole address book to a spam server every time you launch it? Apple has the ability to disable this. NetShare was not disabled, as I am still able to use it. I find it highly unlikely that after all the time that has passed that Apple would disable it for users (assuming they have that ability).
Now what if Apple didnt have this? That spyware trojan app that sends your whole address book to the spam server will be exploiting everyone. Everyone would then be all up in arms how Apple didnt have this emergency backup plan to de-authorize malware apps.
In the end Apple is damned if they do, and damned if they don't. Since no app has been de-authorized yet...- asforme, on 08/08/2008, -3/+8Explain to me why exactly they need to have such an invasive response system when they require being able to examine every program before it can even become available.
- Me1000, on 08/08/2008, -5/+4Then developers would bitch that it is taking AGES for apps to become available for download. Things can slip through the cracks, nothing is perfect. It is obvious that they are just being cautious here. If they had any malicious intent of using it (again, we are assuming this can actually disable apps, WE DONT KNOW THIS FOR SURE) it would have already been using on Apps like netshare.
- umbrellainabin, on 08/08/2008, -5/+2you DO have a point but you just sound like an iFanboy..........sorry.
- Me1000, on 08/08/2008, -5/+4I knew someone would call me a fanboy because I am not willing to say Apple is a horrid company because of this... *sigh*
- haikuFU, on 08/08/2008, -7/+1Actually, I'm kind of torn between this being a good thing or a bad thing. At first glance, it's bad. But, if they do only use it to delete or disable "evil" apps, it's like having an AV program that I don't have to install or maintain. Maybe they should just offer the option to enable/disable it, and somehow protect that option so an evil app couldn't change it for you.
- Atomic1fire, on 08/08/2008, -0/+2except when you have a distribution process that is extremely secure and you require that all apps go through you, the chances of viruses become minuscule.
- Azerael, on 08/08/2008, -0/+3If you're dumb enough to install an 'evil' app you deserve it.
- apotropaic, on 08/08/2008, -7/+1Huh, I don't think I've ever heard the word apple and virus in the same sentence before unless it was saying why os x was better then windows.
- megamod, on 08/07/2008, -9/+54no! Apple is a great company. they just did this because they're so great. If there's an app that is acting like a virus they can uninstall it before it causes any harm...
- OutlawSamurai, on 08/07/2008, -19/+23"Presumably, that would allow Apple to remotely de-authorize those apps, or perhaps even delete them." Note the speculatory keywords of "presumably" and "perhaps."
- centerblack, on 08/08/2008, -9/+5When Apple does something evil with this, the internet has my permission to go nuts. Until then, stfu please.
I haven't written anything using the SDK so I'm not aware of how secure the sandbox is. Regardless, it's not difficult to imagine a scenario where a malicious app could easily get past any sort of Apple review. Put a timer on it. Turn the malicious code on in January '09, 60 days from now, after 50 launches, when the location services say you're in Chicago, etc etc etc etc.
If Apple didn't think of this and didn't have a contingency, I would be surprised. Furthermore, there's absolutely no information about what this list does! Everything is pure speculation. It could just blacklist an application to raise a warning about the application. There's no evidence that applications are going to be deleted or prevented from running.
Apple doesn't want to piss of the developer community anymore than they already are. I think we can extend this logic and make the conclusion that only a really nasty application is going to make this list.
I don't see anything on there. No jailbroken application names. No applications that have been kicked off the app store.- intellimouse, on 08/08/2008, -3/+4"Until then, stfu please."
No, you (please).
"Apple doesn't want to piss of the developer community anymore than they already are."
Whoops, too late.
"I don't see anything on there."
You see a phone home and nobody likes that, especially developers. - OutlawSamurai, on 08/08/2008, -1/+4And Daring Fireball brings sensibility to the table yet again... http://daringfireball.net/2008/08/core_location_bl ...
- intellimouse, on 08/08/2008, -3/+4"Until then, stfu please."
- centerblack, on 08/08/2008, -9/+5When Apple does something evil with this, the internet has my permission to go nuts. Until then, stfu please.
- Appox, on 08/07/2008, -12/+6Why would they ever want to remove your apps?
- colincornaby, on 08/08/2008, -13/+4To prevent trojans from spreading.
If a trojan is found Apple can immediately wipe it off everyone's phones.- JohnFrum, on 08/08/2008, -2/+7Nope. They've build in a model for software as service. In the future they will rent you apps and turn them off for you when the time is up.
That's the real reason. - centerblack, on 08/08/2008, -3/+2Hey John, I'm pretty sure that functionality like that would be built into the AppStore itself..... Not the CoreLocation framework.
Most likely this is there to stop a malicious application from transmitting your GPS location to your psycho-stalker ex girlfriend (assuming you could get a girlfriend). - colincornaby, on 08/08/2008, -0/+1"Nope. They've build in a model for software as service. In the future they will rent you apps and turn them off for you when the time is up.
That's the real reason."
No, it's not... Seriously, it's for deleting trojans or other apps that are causing data loss.
You can even look at the feed. It has an example app on there. Why make the feed public if they're trying to be so secretive?
- JohnFrum, on 08/08/2008, -2/+7Nope. They've build in a model for software as service. In the future they will rent you apps and turn them off for you when the time is up.
- estvir, on 08/08/2008, -7/+13Because this is Apple, when you buy one of their products you do so either knowingly or unknowingly that you're only suppose to use it the way almighty and glorious Steve Jobs deems reasonable and what he thinks is best for you.
- centerblack, on 08/08/2008, -5/+3Really?
Apple has consistently taken a course of action where they do not support hacks or modifications of their products, but they generally don't try to stop them either. (iTunes is probably the only or one of the only exceptions to this, and I'm sure we all understand the reason why)
A *TON* of work goes into writing frameworks and API's for public consumption, especially the documentation and examples that accompany them. You simply can't expect them to provide support for general hackery of their stuff. They release a public API and support it. If you start hooking into unsupported frameworks and API's you're on your own.
Steve Jobs could give a flying midget unicorn pony ***** if you want to run linux on your iPod and embed it into your toaster oven so that it plays "Weird Al Yankovic - Eat It" when your food is ready. He simply has no interest in supporting you in that endeavor.
- centerblack, on 08/08/2008, -5/+3Really?
- BobTheTaco, on 08/08/2008, -0/+1Jailbroken homebrew. Which is kind of stupid since some of the more popular homebrew goes into the apple store.
- colincornaby, on 08/08/2008, -13/+4To prevent trojans from spreading.
- megaton, on 08/08/2008, -20/+7One dupe I understand. Two I can (occasionally) forgive. But FOUR DUPES in the last 8 hours?!
Buried for being the same goddamn story we've had the privilege to read 5 times today...- kolyana, on 08/08/2008, -3/+4People really don't like being told not to dupe up stories do they? You get buried faster than s**t, but truth be told, they're dragging down the already questionable quality of this place.
keep pounding on them and maybe something will rub off.- intellimouse, on 08/08/2008, -0/+2Digg Sucks. News at 11.
- kolyana, on 08/08/2008, -3/+4People really don't like being told not to dupe up stories do they? You get buried faster than s**t, but truth be told, they're dragging down the already questionable quality of this place.
- maxbowman, on 08/08/2008, -12/+21I would think this would be in case somebody built a Trojan into a app or something, thus they could kill the offending app before any real damage is done.
- HOTM, on 08/08/2008, -4/+8Like that can't ever be broken though, hackers will always find a way around security.
- saranagati, on 08/08/2008, -2/+3Yah, all that would need to be done is have that application install another application to another spot. It would be rather simple and their undo application won't fix it.
- BurgerPunch, on 08/08/2008, -1/+4nope, you have to flash the firmware to run unsigned apps
- saranagati, on 08/08/2008, -0/+4good point i always forget that they don't come jail broken.
- Atomic1fire, on 08/08/2008, -1/+1It could be for removing unauthed apps such as jailbreaks but apple bricks Jail breaked iPhone's with updates anyway
viruses are highly unlikely when you have a paranoid company who made the only official distribution area itunes, and trojans as well considering they would see a phone home or know about encrypted code (if thats even possible) - mrBitch, on 08/09/2008, -0/+1RE: "apple bricks Jail breaked iPhone's with updates anyway.."
You are an idiot. You are confusing "jail break" with "unlock".
When you "unlock" you are ***** with the baseband - and an update to your iPhone will completely screw that ***** up.
Jail breaks don't get bricked - the firmware just over-writes the whole damn thing and you have to Jail Break AGAIN.
Is that simple enough for you?
- jabberwolf, on 08/08/2008, -2/+6Um has that happened with blackberry through RIM network or MS Mobile?
Um No, because that's not how a virus spreads unless you have a very very unprotected OS.
Apple?- mrBitch, on 08/09/2008, -1/+1RE: "unless you have a very very unprotected OS."
Microsoft?
- mrBitch, on 08/09/2008, -1/+1RE: "unless you have a very very unprotected OS."
- bbqsalad, on 08/08/2008, -9/+3APYLE
- sjmulder, on 08/08/2008, -8/+42The file was found somewhere in the Core Location framework. It is very well possible that this is only related to blacklisting the use of Core Location by malicious (or other unwanted) apps. There is no evidence that the iPhone actually delete applications on that list. Everything so far except that there is some kind of blacklist that somehow seems related to Core Location is pure speculation.
- centerblack, on 08/08/2008, -4/+4This is the most logical and coherent thought I have seen on this topic.
It would suck if your crazy ex girlfriend or boyfriend installed some application to track your location via gps wouldn't it?
- centerblack, on 08/08/2008, -4/+4This is the most logical and coherent thought I have seen on this topic.
- tekhna, on 08/08/2008, -11/+7That's some pretty serious *****.
- PullingTeeth, on 08/08/2008, -5/+7A lot of press recently for how Apple's iPhone leaves consumers open to getting ripped off. And no, not all press is good press.
- jacobburke, on 08/08/2008, -21/+14Just another reason why this phone is crap.
- jwoulf, on 08/08/2008, -10/+4And nothing of value was lost.
- gllopc, on 08/08/2008, -11/+31 a·larm·ist (ə-lär'mĭst) n. A person who needlessly alarms or attempts to alarm others, as by inventing or spreading false or exaggerated rumors of impending danger or catastrophe.
This comment may not be popular, but Digg seems to be full of alarmists as of late.- fromonesource, on 08/08/2008, -6/+4it's because there's a lot of alarming ***** going on as of late.
http://www.infowars.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t89WwcsOj9U- gllopc, on 08/08/2008, -1/+2I don't think there's anything more than usual, it's just that we have sites like Digg and Reddit which put their front pages in the hands of people with a lot of friends, who rake muck, and often more of that same muck, to the surface.
Although we all know it, it must be said that Digg, Reddit and their ilk aren't news, but bullhorns for those whom most often have a fanboi agenda.
- gllopc, on 08/08/2008, -1/+2I don't think there's anything more than usual, it's just that we have sites like Digg and Reddit which put their front pages in the hands of people with a lot of friends, who rake muck, and often more of that same muck, to the surface.
- MasterGrief, on 08/08/2008, -1/+6Pointing out something like that might get you killed, gllopc!
- estvir, on 08/08/2008, -7/+4Oh, poor Apple! Quick, we need some more stories about Microsoft doing x thing that is possibly bad!
Where are all the Palladium people from the 90s? I hear MS is going to do something horrible with it! I'm positive this time..
- fromonesource, on 08/08/2008, -6/+4it's because there's a lot of alarming ***** going on as of late.
- magicmarc, on 08/08/2008, -9/+8Time to get an iPod Touch.
- umbrellainabin, on 08/08/2008, -5/+4like that wud make any difference
- clyde2801, on 08/08/2008, -0/+3It does...that way you're only Apple's bitch, and not Apple AND AT&T's bitch...
- umbrellainabin, on 08/08/2008, -5/+4like that wud make any difference
- david76, on 08/08/2008, -4/+19If you go to the URL in the article, it displays the following:
{ "Date Generated" = "2008-08-08 00:41:13 Etc/GMT"; "BlackListedApps" = { "com.mal.icious" = { "Description" = "Being really bad!"; "App Name" = "Malicious"; "Date Revoked" = "2004-02-01 08:00:00 Etc/GMT"; }; }; }
Certainly, this service could be used for good as well as evil.- prophetpimp, on 08/08/2008, -3/+6Its apple. it will be used for evil.
- helliottlaw, on 08/08/2008, -3/+7How the hell did someone figure this out?
- alanr19, on 08/08/2008, -0/+10The guy who found it is a known iPhone firmware hacker.
- merreborn, on 08/08/2008, -0/+9Assuming it polls this URL on a regular basis, it's as simple as connecting your iPhone to the internet via a wifi, through a logging proxy.
- nthitz, on 08/08/2008, -9/+24Read the real headline: "Secret URL May Allow Apple to Delete Your iPhone Apps Remotely"
MAY allow, now allows. Don't make ***** up- alanr19, on 08/08/2008, -4/+7For now all the circumstantial evidence is pointing at this being true. Yes circumstantial but can't be ignored.
Now that its out I'll bet that this "harmless" code disappears from its current location after the next update (2.02?) and gets secretly pushed to some other part of the core and hidden better.
Hey Apple got anything to say on this? Yeah didn't think so. - Trilogy, on 08/08/2008, -0/+4Why can't they "make ***** up" now when you people can make those "Apple is going to make a death star!" rumors every week? Just because it would reflect Apple as it is, a naughty party like MS?
- Kelmon, on 08/08/2008, -0/+3Given that it seems to be there to prevent malicious applications from accessing the GPS facilities the headline is definitely alarming. There's nothing here to suggest that the application will be deleted but rather it won't be able to communicate your location.
- alanr19, on 08/08/2008, -4/+7For now all the circumstantial evidence is pointing at this being true. Yes circumstantial but can't be ignored.
- FishThePirate, on 08/08/2008, -15/+11Yet another reason that consumers need to grab Apple by the collar and slap them across the face. Nothing remotely like this should be tolerated. How about instead of saying "Sure, I'm a dumbass who's willing to pay $500 for a phone that decides what I do and don't want." you say something like "No, I'm not buying anything from you until you show me something that's not a piece of *****."
The power is the consumer's.- axcess99, on 08/08/2008, -5/+3Yep. let us also smack down IE and FF for potentially blocking malicious websites (ant-phishing etc). How dare they build in such measures, let me decide if I want to be phished!!!
- arcticblue, on 08/08/2008, -1/+6They do allow you to be phished. All you have to do is ignore the warning.
- Kazaki, on 08/08/2008, -1/+1...But the iPhone isn't a piece of *****!
STOP CONFUSING ME!
- axcess99, on 08/08/2008, -5/+3Yep. let us also smack down IE and FF for potentially blocking malicious websites (ant-phishing etc). How dare they build in such measures, let me decide if I want to be phished!!!
- davidwasman, on 08/08/2008, -14/+201. This already made front page...TWICE
2. Stop being paranoid. Apple isn't being big brother.
3. Apps which are illegally installed do not go in the same folder that this 'feature' deletes from.
...but of course, I will get dugg down for being a voice of reason all because the Apple bashers need something to hate Apple for once again.
Hey guys, here's a f*cking hint - If you hate it so much, remove the f*cking Apple news option from your digg profile...otherwise, shut up.- Avian00, on 08/08/2008, -1/+2In all those points, I tend to agree with you. But there is still a basic expectation in people that even the potential for this kind of behavior should be avoided. Or at the very least, Apple should be completely forthcoming with all the info about this. It comes down to trust, and at our core, we only trust ourselves.
I think another area that bothers people is this notion the growing dependency on Apple to keep the products alive. Apple isn't the only company guilty of this, but it's certainly one of the largest examples. Consider that with most products, once you've purchased the product, the transaction is complete, and the product is yours, no matter what happens to the company in the future. On the other hand, when you buy these apps from Apple, they hold the keys. Even if we assume that Apple is in no way evil, somebody could potentially hack their blacklist server and maliciously deactivate apps world-wide. I think most people just aren't comfortable with that level of power resting on a single entity, regardless of whether they trust them to not be evil.
- Avian00, on 08/08/2008, -1/+2In all those points, I tend to agree with you. But there is still a basic expectation in people that even the potential for this kind of behavior should be avoided. Or at the very least, Apple should be completely forthcoming with all the info about this. It comes down to trust, and at our core, we only trust ourselves.
- seltaeb4, on 08/08/2008, -5/+3All that's wrong in this country and the world, and people choose to complain about this. I guess we're not in such bad shape if this is the sort of thing we worry about.
- mogebier, on 08/08/2008, -8/+5But I thought Apple was a nice, small, friendly company.
This guy makes it seem like all they want is your money.
Oh, wait.......- wilhel1812, on 08/08/2008, -0/+2isn't that what companies is about? earning money?
- frumpsnake, on 08/08/2008, -7/+9Let's see what the article has to say...
Secret URL *May* Allow Apple to Delete Your iPhone Apps Remotely (where did that "may" go in the Digg title?)
*Presumably* that would allow Apple to remotely de-authorize those apps, or *perhaps* even delete them.
Sounds like a lot of guesswork at the moment, yet that doesn't stop the "Apple are going to delete all your Cydia/Installer apps" brigade from coming up with misleading info like the heading above.
Okay, there's a blacklist. That may or may not ever be implemented. Does it stop apps from running? Does it delete them? We don't know. Is it purely for trojan horse applications? We don't know.
What we DO know is that Apple haven't used it to disable any 3rd party apps, despite removing a handful from the store. Doesn't sound like they've done anything evil. - digiguy, on 08/08/2008, -7/+2OKAY PEOPLE, LET'S SEE IF IT'S TRUE. IF APPLE DELETES THE APP FROM PEOPLE'S IPHONES.
PHONE SABER IS NOW PULLED. As of this comment, I still have my phone saber app
http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2008/08/07/phonesa ... - BurgerPunch, on 08/08/2008, -9/+3Yeah and if a malicious app ever got on via App Store they could kill it dead
***** LINUX FREE AS IN SPEECH RETARDS- PainToad, on 08/08/2008, -3/+3You sir are a tard
- b04155, on 08/08/2008, -3/+4Hypothetically, if you get the iPhone without a data plan and the phone keeps calling home to check up on your installed apps, is Apple liable for the incurred charges?
- Khast, on 08/08/2008, -0/+4Nope, you are still liable for the access. (AT&T had similar situations arrise with the iPhone 1.0...some incurring $3,000+ phone bills when the user roamed.)
- Khast, on 08/08/2008, -4/+17If Microsoft did something like that, Microsoft fanboys would be in arms about it. It would be like World War 3 with anti-trust lawsuits, and blog spam.
If Linux did it, people would decompile it, remove the offending code, and 5 new variations of Linux would arrise within a week.
When Apple does it, Apple Fanboys just sit back and mindlessly exclaim "It's for our protection"- richardhenry, on 08/08/2008, -1/+3I don't understand what you're on about. What's the alternative; circulate emails telling everyone that "App X" will send a copy of all your contacts to some unknown server? Isn't it best just to nip the problem in the bud and instantly recall all of the downloads? It's a phone, not a computer.
- scruffles, on 08/08/2008, -1/+3You don't need to decompile Linux. The source is already available.
- supermanred, on 08/11/2008, -1/+1Microsoft killed my evaluation copy of XP once. So what the ***** are you talking about? It put me in a boot loop. They later changed their policy as they inadvertantly disabled legal, paying customers.
- Danny, on 08/08/2008, -8/+1Would Micro$oft do this?
- benitojuarez, on 08/08/2008, -8/+6Apple is nazish with their computers, I would not be suprised if they did this with their phones. I hope for all the iphone users sake that nothing ever comes of this.
- clamhead, on 08/08/2008, -5/+2How is apple "nazish" with their computers? OS doesn't need an activation code, doesn't call home, and besides a couple macbook pros's I've got it running on a 400 buck pc, so what are you referring to?
- digiguy, on 08/08/2008, -3/+3Don't bother. people know ***** about Apple and their products. Same BS different day
- benitojuarez, on 08/08/2008, -4/+4The fact i can't run OS X on my computer because it doesnt have a shiny apple logo on it is pretty nazish to me...damn fanboys.
- Burn, on 08/08/2008, -2/+2Did you even read the post of the person you replied to? They stated, and I quote, "I've got it running on a 400 buck pc".
- benitojuarez, on 08/08/2008, -3/+3My top of the line (a year ago) pc i built from parts for near 2 grand does not conform to hackintosh standards. I'm not going to shell out another 400 bucks for apple complaince.
- tomis, on 08/08/2008, -0/+1Godwin. You fail.
- Kelmon, on 08/08/2008, -0/+1Well, if no malicious applications appear then there will be no use for this feature and everyone's a winner. Here's hoping...
- supermanred, on 08/11/2008, -1/+1Nazish? They put in a safeguard to kill malicious code... How is that Nazish? You're a retard and will always be destined to have a ***** operating system like Windows where you have to be the one antivirus, spyware, fixing holes in the OS etc...
It's nice that they spend so much time improving their OSes, even the iPhone OS to make sure it stays stable and virus free... other companies spend time putting different lipstick on their previous pig of an OS (95, 98, me, 2000, xp and vista are all the same flawed peice of crap that cant come close to Unix)
- clamhead, on 08/08/2008, -5/+2How is apple "nazish" with their computers? OS doesn't need an activation code, doesn't call home, and besides a couple macbook pros's I've got it running on a 400 buck pc, so what are you referring to?
- Kingolis, on 08/08/2008, -1/+13 Jailbroken phones can just add a line to their /etc/hosts file and no longer have to worry about the chance of their precious apps being deleted by apple.
##
# Host Database
#
# localhost is used to configure the loopback interface
# when the system is booting. Do not change this entry.
##
127.0.0.1 localhost
255.255.255.255 broadcasthost
::1 localhost
fe80::1%lo0 localhost
127.0.0.1 iphone-services.apple.com - alphadog, on 08/08/2008, -6/+4This is just wrong! Yet another reason not to purchase the iphone. First it's AT&T and now this Big Brother attitude.
Remind me of something; don't people that have an iphone actually pay for it. Apple isn't giving them out for free, right? - Caliswag323, on 08/08/2008, -4/+1Welp I guess I'm going to have to SSH into my jailbroken iPhone 3g and delete it.
- elitemrp, on 08/08/2008, -1/+8Anyone stop to think this might be for enterprise customers? They already have remote-wipe, maybe this is just to allow remote-app-wipe so enterprises can force delete inhouse developed apps from employees. Perhaps the app has a big bug and they need to kill it until they fix it, or to just delete discontinued apps, or maybe just to delete non work-related apps on employee phones (games for example). Or maybe Apple is just evil and they want to rip Super Monkey Ball from us when we're almost at the last level.
Just a thought. - feacesface, on 08/08/2008, -7/+3It must be good for me if Steve Jobs wants to do it.
- maximatron, on 08/08/2008, -3/+4... And let the retards spread this pure speculation as fact.
- ErickStevenson, on 08/08/2008, -4/+2This doesn't sound good for anyone if any company is doing this. I don't need them to choose what I can run on a product, I bought it, let me do what I want with it. If this is true it sucks. It's good that people are able to report these, atleast the consumers know what to watch out for. I'm a person who has no "brand" favorite. These are after all corporations who just want your money, get over yourselves, unless your Steve Jobs or Bill Gates bestfriend or ***** buddy, I think you need to criticize the products of these companies so they actually produce quality products and not screw you over, unless you like getting ***** in the ass by these guys.
- Kelmon, on 08/08/2008, -0/+3Thrilling. Now all we need is some facts rather than idle speculation and we can have a proper debate on the subject. Remote diddling with your device is, of course, a bad thing but until there is actual confirmation of what this is for (apparently it's for stopping malicious applications from reporting your position rather than removing them) there doesn't seem to be anything to warrant some sort of privacy crusade. If the evidence is anything to go by, this probably protects your privacy more than anything else.
- trixterIreland, on 08/08/2008, -4/+1so there is this url that the phones connect to. Ok, fine, assuming you dont have to pay for the data exchanges such as on some gprs/edge plans where everything is metered (note the iphone is sold in more places than america).
But that url relies upon DNS, something that has been shown to be problematic, and it could let unauthorized people decide arbitrarily to blacklist applications and DoS your phone. Or blacklist some security tool that you may have, or whatever. At at least https making this less likely, but not impossible. - ptFoe, on 08/08/2008, -5/+4iSuck
- Kelmon, on 08/08/2008, -0/+2Well, at least you are self aware. Congratulations.
- richardhenry, on 08/08/2008, -1/+7What? People are actually even starting to ask questions about this? It's a great idea. Just because it's good for Apple's PR, doesn't mean it's bad for you? I mean what, you want to keep your malicious apps?!
**HEADLINE: First virus on the iPhone — 10th of August**
Apple recalled the application from all of their devices within two hours, and immediately removed it from the app store. They provided refunds to all the people that purchased it.
OR:
Millions affected by first iPhone virus. Emails lost. Calls dropped. Phones bricked. Kittens dead.- eastmanweb, on 08/09/2008, -0/+1Those poor kittens
- jbella, on 08/08/2008, -0/+2Seems to be like this could either be a good feature or a bad violation of your rights. Good if it's used to disable malicious programs that somehow passed the App Store screening process. Bad if it's used to arbitrarily disable programs that Apple does not like. I suppose we won't really know which it is until Apple actually uses it And since we know about the url.. we will know immediately if Apple uses it.
I think everyone needs to calm down a bit and take a breath. Life is too short to get all worked up over silly ***** like this. - tomis, on 08/08/2008, -1/+2Yea, damn Apple for possibly building a way to possibly save us from a possible trojan horse app that could possibly make its way onto the store! Not to mention that such an app wouldn't be able to do much damage as it is as each app is sandboxed...
If Apple were to use this in a malicious way then wouldn't they have blacklisted those apps that they've pulled? But they haven't. So we have no idea.
If you don't want Apple baby-sitting you then jailbreak the phone and stop whining. Or better yet, go use an alternative open platform phone such as... - moyn, on 08/08/2008, -3/+1"Why 2008 will be like, um, 1984".
- Rudegar, on 08/08/2008, -4/+2http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com said it best
"Apple No Like Your Application... Apple Smash!"
:P - clyde2801, on 08/08/2008, -3/+1As Apple's market share grows, there's going to be more of a backlash against Steve Job's benevolent despotism. Apple does what Jobs wants, make no mistake about it.
- Kelmon, on 08/08/2008, -0/+2Unlike every other CEO, huh?
- dmcbride6, on 08/08/2008, -0/+2Has it been confirmed this is NOT actually part of remote wipe technology for exchange? Remote wipe is a necessity for most enterprise users and is infact a way to protect us - not invade privacy.
Even if it is Apple's version of remote wipe, this would be a welcome addition. If my phone gets stolen, the last thing I want is people snooping around my data. - malevalent, on 08/08/2008, -2/+1Ha! Keep drinking the kool aid.
- xxryan9559xx, on 08/08/2008, -0/+1:O Guys, this is a common UNIX blacklist. Nothing to worry about. It keeps malicious software off of your iPhone.
- JohnLawson, on 08/08/2008, -1/+1Well. [insert jab at apple here] [insert windows fan boy laughing here]
I'm not going to blog this until this becomes fact and not speculation.
Why do people like apple again? - Robart, on 08/09/2008, -2/+1Apple=Microsoft
- CocoaLab, on 08/11/2008, -0/+0Hey, it's a CoreLocation blacklist. ie, it could be used to stop apps from using CoreLocation services. That's all. It won't stop your apps from running. Just because someone says it on the interwebs don't means its true.
The tribal mind is amazing. We don't make decisions based on facts, we make them based on our preconceptions. If you dislike Apple, you are likely to see this as a massive threat and get upset - regardless of the facts. If you like Apple you are likely to see this is a way for them to protect users, ie you - regardless of the facts.. Both these views are wrong.
But hey, let's just keep calling each other names. That's sure to make it all okay. - neeerani1, on 09/07/2008, -0/+0
Hi!! See it and provide some suggestion.
http://digg.com/celebrity/Sexy_Wrestler_Trish_Stra ...
http://digg.com/soccer/Didier_Drogba_Top_5_Goals
http://digg.com/soccer/Footbal_Babes_Amazing_Cheer ...
http://digg.com/olympics/Disgraced_U_S_sprinter_Jo ...
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by