Posted Wednesday 5th November 2008 22:23 GMT
they should have been expecting this sort of thing to happen given that android was meant to be open source. after all, if anyone is able to change/ alter the code, then is there any point in locking it in the first place
mines the one with the phones in the pockets.
Posted Wednesday 5th November 2008 23:36 GMT
> if anyone is able to change/ alter the code, then is there any point in locking it in the first place
Yes, if the hardware prevents the altered code from running in some way. This is called tivo-isation, after the best-known example of a product that does it.
Posted Wednesday 5th November 2008 23:36 GMT
Never saw that coming at all....
Posted Wednesday 5th November 2008 23:36 GMT
Does it count as a jailbreak if there is writing on the ceiling saying: "Gdy mat. Look at the hinjis, Ned."
Posted Thursday 6th November 2008 01:05 GMT
to presume that as this phone utilises an open source OS, using the device as root would be a matter of choice.
I really didn't think it was silly of me to imagine that an open source OS meant an open device over which the user has control, especially as user control seems to be a primary tenant of open source. One lives and learns. Not closed nor open, Perhaps the OS is slightly ajar.
Posted Thursday 6th November 2008 01:05 GMT
You sir win a genuine CMOT Dibbler pie* for the PTerry quote
*made from Genuine animal products
Posted Thursday 6th November 2008 10:53 GMT
opensource is only there for telecoms and phone manufacturers, to make a system that works for them. like nokia has openned symbian for. while still claiming glory for the original creators of the opensource enviroment.
its not there for any old tard who cant use windows to mess around with and think theyre coders. and most symbian phones use root with memcards as e:\ or some other path
Posted Thursday 6th November 2008 10:53 GMT
So Google patch this first crack, which will I imagine require people to actively update their phone - somehow. Still, having both the source code and easy shell access to 'first cut' phones should allow plenty more back doors to be discovered. When will companies learn that locking such advanced hardware, that has so many other potential uses, is like a dark grey rag to a bull?
Liked the comment about the OS being 'slightly ajar' ;-), and with open source I guess that's a slightly ajar door into a greenhouse? Mine's the one with the doorstop in the pocket.
Posted Thursday 6th November 2008 10:53 GMT
This isn't really a hack is it?
It's basically typing /system/bin/telnetd into the phone's shell app then opening a connection from a nearby computer, that you go straight in as root is similar to the situation with iPhone1.0 where everything ran as root, marginally less secure due to the lack of user/pass prompts but essentially it's like claiming 'I turned on the SMB service and now I can browse files, lol loophole!!!11eleven'
I'd expect this to get closed down fairly quickly as Android evolves to a more secure platform a la iPhone 2.0 but for the meantime, start your bricking Gtards.
Posted Thursday 6th November 2008 10:53 GMT
It can be open source and locked down. All open source means is that the code is available and freely modifiable. You can see it and change it, and install your code on the device, then run it. I don't see how what google is doing prevents it from being open source.
Posted Thursday 6th November 2008 16:32 GMT
"Not closed nor open, Perhaps the OS is slightly ajar."
Q. When is a Googlephone not a Googlephone?
A. When it's ajar.
Sign up, sign up for The Register's weekly IT security newsletter - click here
Back to the article
