iPhone 3G has a kill switch according to Steve Jobs

[JWiPhone]

If anyone had any doubts here is proof that Steve Jobs and Apple has a kill switch for the Apple 3G.

"Apple CEO Steve Jobs has confirmed that the iPhone 3G has a kill switch that can remotely remove software from the devices. "


http://news.yahoo.com/s/nf/20080811/tc_nf/61270

[BigCiX]

Wow..a kill switch on a phone!

[styfle]

the iPhone 3G has a kill switch that can remotely remove software from the devices.
doesnt mention v1 iphones lol
i guess im good

[dturner]

doesnt mention v1 iphones lol
i guess im good
I believe this is actually in the 2.0 firmware. So it true we are under the gun also.

[aenti]

Lol, yea, I remember posting about this in offtopic. What do you guys think about it?

[dturner]

Lol, yea, I remember posting about this in offtopic. What do you guys think about it?
As long as Apple uses it for what they say it is a good thing buuuuut..............

Does NetShare come to mind?

[monkeysrock0622]

I don't see what the big deal is...it is just so they an remove "malicious software", apps that can harm your iPhone. And yes it is on both the 3G and the V1. http://www.macrumors.com/2008/08/06/apples-ability-to-deactivate-malicious-app-store-apps/

[aenti]

The whole thing is, Apple says they will use it for "malicious" software.
Malicious could be defined in many different ways, and I feel that my security is at risk. I am sticking with 2.0

[monkeysrock0622]

2.0 has this availability also...that is when it was introduced. There is no way Apple will use this "remote" to look into any of our private information. Plus, the government can already do worse stuff than that with any cell phone.

[MileHighRob]

As long as Apple uses it for what they say it is a good thing buuuuut..............

Does NetShare come to mind?
I agree. The reasoning behind the kill switch is valid. It's a bit concerning knowing how many apps they've already allowed to be released that could possibly pose security issues. If the infamously stupid "I Am Rich" app slipped past them God only knows how closely they are examining these progs. It is very well possible that any of the password keepers could actually compromise someone's personal data. The kill switch doesn't bother me in the least manner.

[cliffeman]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nf/20080811/tc_nf/61270

Did a search and didn't see this posted yet. Interesting to know apple has remote access to our phones. *raises eyebrow* But not really surprising.

Any thoughts? comments?

[MileHighRob]

Actually someone else posted this earlier. You can find that thread here. (http://www.everythingicafe.com/forum/iphone-3g/iphone-3g-has-a-kill-switch-according-to-steve-jobs-34622.html)

[Lincoln]

I'm glad that they do. Obviously (and thankfully) they won't use it on NetShare - otherwise they already would have. It's good to know that if something malicious sneaks into the AppStore, Apple can remove any trace quickly.

[aenti]

I don;t like it one bit.
Too much risk.

[MileHighRob]

Lincoln maybe you can combine the two threads before they get out of hand.

[cliffeman]

hehe...guess i didn't search hard enough:embarrassed:

[zeluiz22]

I agree. The reasoning behind the kill switch is valid. It's a bit concerning knowing how many apps they've already allowed to be released that could possibly pose security issues. If the infamously stupid "I Am Rich" app slipped past them God only knows how closely they are examining these progs. It is very well possible that any of the password keepers could actually compromise someone's personal data. The kill switch doesn't bother me in the least manner.

wow... people will apologize for Apple for almost anything. Groupthink in leaps and bounds.

[MileHighRob]

Not apologizing for Apple for anything. I simply don't want any of the app writers to sneak in a code that could actually jeopardize my personal data. You really don't know me.

[aenti]

2.0 has this availability also...that is when it was introduced. There is no way Apple will use this "remote" to look into any of our private information. Plus, the government can already do worse stuff than that with any cell phone.

No, I believe it was introduced in 2.0.1.
And the government can only do these types of things with proper validation. Methods on how to get that validation (i.e Patriot Act) is what is shady.

Regardless to say, I do not agree with this switch. "Malicious" software, ey Apple? Isn't Apple already checking every app for "malicious" software?
-Auorora Feint: Accessed your phone book. Apple pulled the app, and problem was fixed. No need for a switch.

I just don;t need a switch in my software.

[Lincoln]

Similar threads merged, FYI.

Aurora Feint wouldn't be a great example here. This switch probably won't ever be used, and if does, it will be to protect users from having personal data stolen. I'm not sure why this counts as "apologizing for Apple."

[aenti]

That's just my point. By Apple's standards, there shouldn't be any malicious software getting into the AppStore. They say they review every app to allow it in, why need a kill switch?

[Lincoln]

Like I said, it probably won't ever be used for that reason. Apple will detect malicious apps before they go in. However, no matter how tight the security, there is always a possibility that something will get through, and it's wise to have backup like this kill switch.

[aenti]

Well, I hope your right, because all hell will break loose if it becomes a privacy issue.
PS- After I post this, one more post till I am a Genius.

[MileHighRob]

Well, I hope your right, because all hell will break loose if it becomes a privacy issue.
PS- After I post this, one more post till I am a Genius.
Doing a big reveal?

[aenti]

What the hell? One of my posts just disappeared. Ok, now after this post, I guess.

[BigCiX]

so can this killswitch remove jailbroken apps too?

[tagore]

Call me crazy, but I grew up on PCs and it seems like most obvious scenario here isn't a data security issue. It's that some very clever griefers make throwing that switch their personal project.

It's an interesting culture difference. I'm coming to the iphone from a KTC Kaiser/Tilt (the battery life is awful) and If MS did something similar on WM6, people would seriously swallow their tongues.

[Saurabh]

I bet its ALL talk.

[SmartAlx]

Like I said, it probably won't ever be used for that reason. Apple will detect malicious apps before they go in. However, no matter how tight the security, there is always a possibility that something will get through, and it's wise to have backup like this kill switch.
We're worried about other apps getting access to our private data so Apple takes access to the private data so it can protect it?

So typical of the world we find ourselves living in now. "For the sake of security, we are going to take over your security. Trust us. Sure, the old regime abused their power. But we wont. wink. wink."

No thank you. Apple has proven to me time and again that they are not to be trusted, anymore. Maybe when Woz was there, but Steve is too controlling.

I will trust the Dev Team to remove this "feature."

[iChristian]

Steve is controlling but maybe thats good. I think that if a virus starts spreading on the phone, they should have a plan B to fall into because the last thing they want to do is recall millions of phones because they would lose millions of dollars just by trusting some crazy developer. Always good to have a backup plan.

[JimmyR]

Guys, I don't think this is as bad as you think.

This is the way I understand it.
Each developer of iPhone apps is issued a developer certificate and a digital signature which they use to digitally sign apps before they get sent to apple for approval. Apple then adds their final signature to it after approval and before it goes on sale. When the apps is downloaded the iPhone checks these signatures to see if the app should be allowed to run. Since each developer uses a unique digital signature, if a security threat occurs, apple can revoke a particular developers certificate. Once they revoke the certificate, apps written by that developer wont run anymore.

I believe that this kill switch is actually the mechanism of revoking developer certificates. So they're not actually probing the phones, or invading our privacy, but just managing developer certificates.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[iLobster]

so can this killswitch remove jailbroken apps too?

Doesn't seem like it. Jailbroken apps do not have any digital signing and are not loaded through the apps store. They are already unauthorized by Apple, so if Apple could remotely prevent them from running they would have done so already.

[chrismmm]

Guys, I don't think this is as bad as you think.

This is the way I understand it.
Each developer of iPhone apps is issued a developer certificate and a digital signature which they use to digitally sign apps before they get sent to apple for approval. Apple then adds their final signature to it after approval and before it goes on sale. When the apps is downloaded the iPhone checks these signatures to see if the app should be allowed to run. Since each developer uses a unique digital signature, if a security threat occurs, apple can revoke a particular developers certificate. Once they revoke the certificate, apps written by that developer wont run anymore.

I believe that this kill switch is actually the mechanism of revoking developer certificates. So they're not actually probing the phones, or invading our privacy, but just managing developer certificates.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.


I have heard this before and yes it is common to take this approach with dev personnel.

[theevilone]

I do not like the idea, it's my phone I paid for it it's mine hear me Jobs. So I killed the kill switch.

[cliffeman]

if you are that adament about the kill switch, BossPrefs can disable it if you are jailbroken. I just happen to come across it this morning.

[Witness]

if you are that adament about the kill switch, BossPrefs can disable it if you are jailbroken. I just happen to come across it this morning.

what is the preference called?

[cliffeman]

what is the preference called?
If you goto more on the top right, it's at the bottom of the list.

http://i339.photobucket.com/albums/n479/cliffeman480/photo.jpg

http://i339.photobucket.com/albums/n479/cliffeman480/photo1.jpg

[Witness]

If you goto more on the top right, it's at the bottom of the list.

http://i339.photobucket.com/albums/n479/cliffeman480/photo.jpg

http://i339.photobucket.com/albums/n479/cliffeman480/photo1.jpg

thanks , i didnt know there was a 2.12 version , im on 2.10 , im gonna go download it right now

[SmartAlx]

HAH! I KNEW I could count on them! I was hoping that the killswitch (being buggy) might be the reason why all of my apps are crashing. But too bad. Seems that there is another bigger problem than a confused killswitch.

[Lincoln]

HAH! I KNEW I could count on them! I was hoping that the killswitch (being buggy) might be the reason why all of my apps are crashing. But too bad. Seems that there is another bigger problem than a confused killswitch.

Why would the apps be buggy because a kill switch? The purpose of it is to remove apps, not make them buggy.