Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Upcoming Firmware Will Brick Unlocked iPhones

Posted by kdawson on Tue Sep 25, 2007 08:06 AM
from the slim-and-elegant-bricks dept.
iCry writes "It was rumored last week, and Apple has now confirmed it: 'Apple said today that a firmware update to the iPhone due to be released later this week "will likely result" in SIM-unlocked iPhones turning into very expensive bricks... So what are users of SIM-unlocked iPhones to do? Not run the latest software update, that's for sure. Users can instead pray to the hacking deities — the famed iPhone Dev Team that released the free software unlock, and iPhoneSIMfree, which released a commercial software unlock — to write applications that will undo the unlocks, as it were, if those users want to run the latest iPhone software.'"
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Apple: Apple May Be Breaking the Law With Policy On iPhone Unlocks 385 comments
an anonymous reader writes "Apple's recent decision to void warranties for folks that unlocked their iPhones may wind them up in legal hot water. The site Phone News points out that Apple appears to have broken a key warranty law relevant to SIM unlocks. The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, a law decades old, would seem to prevent Apple from voiding warranties in the way it is threatening to do with the iPhone, or so the site argues. 'The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act states that Apple cannot void a warranty for a product with third-party enhancements or modifications to their product. The only exception to this rule is if Apple can determine that the modification or enhancement is responsible [for] damaging the product in question ... The legal [questions are]: Is the SIM Unlock process that has become mainstream doing damage to iPhone? And, also, is Apple designing future software updates to do damage to iPhone when said SIM Unlock code is present?'"
[+] Apple: New Firmware Fixes Previously Bricked iPhones 182 comments
drcagn writes "Ars Technica reports that Apple's new 1.1.3 firmware update unbricks iPhones damaged from unlocking and updating the firmware months ago. In September, users who hacked their iPhone's firmware to unlock it found their iPhone bricked when they updated to new firmware, creating a massive upset and internet furor. Although Apple claimed this was not an intended effect of the update, it held the stance that it is not their responsibility to ensure that updates work with users' warranty-voiding hacks, and many cried foul. This update, which provides new features Jobs showed off at Macworld, while not officially unbricking the iPhone, has restored iPhones from Gizmodo and a reader of the Unofficial Apple Weblog."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Is that even legal? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mrjb (547783) on Tuesday September 25 2007, @08:08AM (#20741225)
    Is that even legal?
    • by MistaE (776169) on Tuesday September 25 2007, @08:12AM (#20741261) Homepage
      If you look at the comments that Phil Schiller [macrumors.com] made yesterday, Apple's taking the position that they don't "mean" to brick it, but it just "might happen" anyways, which of course is total bullshit. At least they're not shooting themselves in the foot immediately by saying that they're deliberately trying to brick 'em.

      Now my question is, what exactly do they need to update that would cause such brickage.
      • by TooMuchToDo (882796) on Tuesday September 25 2007, @08:17AM (#20741311)
        I would expect that people who were smart enough to pay for the phone with a credit card would say "Hey, my phone is busted. Fix it or I'm returning it. If you don't accept the return, I'm doing a chargeback." Visa/mastercard/discover/amex provide a fairly decent product warranty program for items purchased with one of their cards.
          • by DustyShadow (691635) on Tuesday September 25 2007, @08:34AM (#20741523) Homepage
            Morality leaves the equation when a billion dollar corporation is on the other end of the transaction. Also, Apple is the one not playing fair here. Not the iPhone owners.
            • by cyberworm (710231) <cyberworm@gmai[ ]om ['l.c' in gap]> on Tuesday September 25 2007, @08:41AM (#20741597) Homepage
              I think the unlocked iPhone owners are the ones not playing fair. THEY KNOWINGLY took the risk of bricking their iPhones when they unlocked them. They knew (or should have known) that the potential for the iphone to become unusable in the future existed.

              If morality leaves the equation when a billion dollar corporation is on the other end, what makes you think fairness stayed? As far as I know, nothing requires Apple to sell you an iPhone at all. What isn't fair, is voiding your warranty then crying foul when it breaks.

              I don't agree with bricking unlocked iphones, but you were warned.
              • by schon (31600) on Tuesday September 25 2007, @08:53AM (#20741713) Homepage

                I think the unlocked iPhone owners are the ones not playing fair.
                Poor Apple - people are buying things from them and then using them in ways that Apple hadn't intended! That's so totally unfair to Apple I can't believe it!

                I mean god forbid that someone would buy something and then not expect the vendor to have complete and utter control over it! What is this world coming to?!?!
                • by frdmfghtr (603968) on Tuesday September 25 2007, @09:38AM (#20742263)

                  Poor Apple - people are buying things from them and then using them in ways that Apple hadn't intended! That's so totally unfair to Apple I can't believe it!
                  Sarcasm aside, that is exactly the same reason why unlockers shouldn't bitch if their iPhones become iBricks. They are using them in a way the manufacturer hadn't intended them to be used.

                  From the iPhone warranty: [apple.com]

                  This warranty does not apply: (a) to damage caused by use with non-Apple products; (b) to damage caused by accident, abuse, misuse, flood, fire,
                  earthquake or other external causes; (c) to damage caused by operating the product outside the permitted or intended uses described by Apple; (d)
                  to damage caused by service (including upgrades and expansions) performed by anyone who is not a representative of Apple or an Apple Authorized
                  Service Provider ("AASP"); (e) to a product or part that has been modified to alter functionality or capability without the written permission of Apple;
                  (f)
                  to consumable parts, such as batteries, unless damage has occurred due to a defect in materials or workmanship; (g) to cosmetic damage, including but
                  not limited to scratches, dents and broken plastic on ports; or (h) if any Apple serial number has been removed or defaced.
                  In other words, swim at your own risk, but don't bitch to us if you get eaten by an alligator; you were told to stay out of the water.

                  The other option is to simply forgo the update, or re-lock it.
                    • by abaddononion (1004472) on Tuesday September 25 2007, @09:52AM (#20742479)
                      That's a fine point, but I'll respond with the standard question (and, maybe this doesnt apply to you. I have no previous history with you, so I dont know):

                      Why is it that when a company like Microsoft or Oracle does some sort of lock-in or stunt like this, they're "so evil" and it's just such a demonstration of how evil they are, but when Apple does it they're just "doing what a business has to do"?

                      You are absolutely correct in your point. Apple is no way obligated to "support" hacked iPhones. However, how does it BENEFIT them to go after the phones and turn them into bricks? And you can just about bet with safe odds that this WAS deliberate. They are going after these hacked iPhones as if they were a threat to the company and their profits, and that, to me, is just... well, asshole.

                      I agree that Apple's not obligated to supply full support for hacked iPhones. I agree with that 100%. And if this new bricking was *caused* by a REAL feature-upgrade that Apple was trying to do, and it *happened* to collide with the hacks... then that's fine and dandy and sucks for everyone. However, I dont think anyone believes that's what is actually happening here. Apple (like Sony), has shown again and again that they are SERIOUSLY against homebrewing of any sort, and will implement over and over again whatever features they can to stymie those efforts. Everyone can readily admit that Sony is a bunch of assholes over their handling of the PSP. Why is it just SO hard for people to admit it with Apple? As I said, maybe this doesnt apply to you. Maybe you're always even-handed and would have come out and supported Microsoft or Sony or any of those other companies if they were doing this exact same stunt. However, if you would not have, perhaps you should take a look at yourself and consider "You might be a fanboy".
                  • by TooMuchToDo (882796) on Tuesday September 25 2007, @09:30AM (#20742143)
                    Heh chief, better check your facts. You don't agree to the contract when you buy the phone. You agree to it when you activate it at home. If I don't activate it with ATT, I don't agree to any contracts.

                    Also, I have a problem with a company actively preventing you from doing something protected by law (unlocking a phone is protected under the DMCA).

              • by Applekid (993327) on Tuesday September 25 2007, @09:05AM (#20741855)

                What isn't fair, is voiding your warranty then crying foul when it breaks.
                It's one thing to void your warranty and crying that they won't fix your mistake. It's another thing altogether to void your warranty and have them reach out and break an otherwise 100% working phone.
                • Don't apply any updates then, its that simple.

                  Apple are selling what is essentially a sealed unit, every single device out there should be 100% identical (other than user data) in Apples view, so why should they check to see if their universal update to the iPhone would cause your individual unit harm? Its an extra hassle and effort that they really should have no need to do, since they sold the item with the intent of it remaining identical.

                  If you change the game by modding or unlocking the iPhone, the onus is on you and you alone to then keep abreast of the play and pay due diligence to any updates to ensure they don't have any adverse effect on your non standard item.
            • by cyberworm (710231) <cyberworm@gmai[ ]om ['l.c' in gap]> on Tuesday September 25 2007, @09:21AM (#20742025) Homepage

              And because Apple knew full well that people would want to hack the iPhone, and they should have tried to make the system safely hackable, even if they didn't want any users doing it.


              That is some seriously flawed logic. Look, the iPhone was promised to only work on Cingular/Att. That's it. That's all. You had three simple choices.

              a)buy iphone with att service
              b)buy iphone, unlock it, and bite the bullet
              c)don't buy iphone

              Apple isn't obligated to do any of the things you mentioned. All Apple has done, is sell a device that works as advertised. That is their only obligation.
      • by @madeus (24818) <slashdot_24818@mac.com> on Tuesday September 25 2007, @08:35AM (#20741543)

        Apple's taking the position that they don't "mean" to brick it, but it just "might happen" anyways, which of course is total bullshit.
        To any developer I would think it would be immediately obvious what you are saying is not true (it's in no way 'total bullshit' that rendering the device unable to boot "might happen" accidentally). Hell, even to any use of a Linux or BSD distribution that uses binary packages that should be immediately obvious it's a likely scenario that you could screw the device by blindly applying a delta to a binary that is different from the intended target binary.

        Of course it might "brick" a hacked iPod without them meaning to (note, Phil Schiller is quoted as specially referring to 'unlocked or hacked' iPhones). Even if they are just making a minor update to a simple app, they might be using a newer version of an existing library in the new version, so that library update gets rolled into the delta too. That might also mean other more core things (which have been recompiled to also use that new library) get included and a hack that hooks into them might break, which would screw up the device, rendering it unusable.

        This is unlikely to affect users who have only unlocked their phone and is much more likely to affect at users who have also modded their phones in other ways (particularly if they have any software that activates on startup - and particularly software that might screw up if it can't start properly).

        I don't have an iPhone, but I'm assuming even if it was "bricked" to the point of not being able to start up normally it would *still* be possible to reset the firmware on it (as it is with the iPods), so it wouldn't *really* be bricked - hence my use of inverted commas.

        • by slashname3 (739398) on Tuesday September 25 2007, @08:57AM (#20741757)
          "not legal as they are challenging a consumer's right to do with his personally owned property what he wishes."

          Apple is not going to go out and force those users to install the update. Those users that have voided their warranties and unlocked their phones were given a warning. Apple was actually being nice instead of just putting out the update and then having a huge splash in the news when all those unlocked iPhones suddenly turned into bricks.

          Once someone unlocked the phone Apple's no longer has an responsibility to make future updates work with that hack. The end user is responsible. The end user can do whatever they want with the product. Just don't go back to the company that sold it to you and complain if you can not get it to work outside of the network they told you it was designed for.

    • by fymidos (512362) on Tuesday September 25 2007, @08:18AM (#20741333) Journal
      IANAL, but i'm pretty sure that *not byuing* the iPhone untill apple stops doing stuff like that, is perfectly legal...
      • by putzin (99318) on Tuesday September 25 2007, @08:27AM (#20741457) Homepage
        No, Microsoft had the option to not purchase made illegal and immoral quite a while ago. Apple is just riding the coat tails. In summer 2008, I believe it also becomes illegal not to use AT&T for all services including face to face visits with friends and family. In 2009, not only will it be illegal to smoke, but also to not use Apple and AT&T HW, SW, and services for everything you do (I hear the iToilet touch flush will be amazing). All this for the low cost of 40% of your yearly salary or $30K, whichever is greater.
  • Well... (Score:5, Funny)

    by zantolak (701554) <zantolak@nOsPaM.comcast.net> on Tuesday September 25 2007, @08:08AM (#20741227)
    At least it's a stylish brick!
  • by EvilSpudBoy (1159091) on Tuesday September 25 2007, @08:14AM (#20741291)

    There are instructions on how to relock an iPhone here [tuaw.com]

    It seems a bit involved

  • by dominux (731134) on Tuesday September 25 2007, @08:19AM (#20741353) Homepage
    if you want a Linux based, good looking, feature full and open phone then have a look at Open Moko [openmoko.com] it is probably going to be capable of multitouch (the touchscreen hardware can do it but the software does not take advantage yet) it will come without a contract so I will be getting an O2 sim only contract when they come out next month. OpenMoko in October, OLPC in November, wow, I am going to be skint by Christmas.
  • by bstarrfield (761726) on Tuesday September 25 2007, @08:21AM (#20741365)

    I'm an Apple fanboy - I've used Macs since 1984, worked for Apple for a couple of years, and have promoted Apple equipment and software where I've been employed. But at this moment, I'm disgusted. There is no need to disable the unlocked iPhone's, and Jobs and crew should damn well accept that some of us actually refuse to use AT&T on principal. Think Different my a**.

    I'm not going to subscribe to AT&T. AT&T, the firm that's trying to eliminate net neutrality. AT&T, the reconstituted (near) monopoly. AT&T the firm that opened their switch boxes to the NSA without hesitation and is now attempting to manipulate legislation to provide immunity from prosecution in that matter.

    On a practical note, Does Mr. Jobs even recognize how expensive his bed partner is overseas? And this matter practically to myself and my family. Apple, as normal, has forgotten that Israel exists. Apple has, as far as I know, has never sold its products directly in Israel. If I want to send an iPhone to my family in Israel, should I have to sign up for AT&T and pay for their pathetic World Traveler plan? The world does exist outside the US and a few European markets.

    Incidentally - my evil unlocked iPhone works perfectly on T-Mobile - without Visual Voice Mail, but gods, I'll live. So what, precisely, is the point of altering the modem firmware, except to break unlocking? Point out examples of the baseband firmware wreaking havoc on the network; explain how this change benefits users.

    The iPhone is the first tablet computer I've seen that inspires the imagination. I want to write programs for it, I want to explore a new user interface. If it runs OS X, treat it like an OS X box and let us get on with writing the programs that will sell the bloody thing. Don't freeze us out while you write such amazing accomplishments as the "Wireless i-Tunes Store" while we're trying to write vertical apps for the medical profession, law, and other fields.

    Job's, former AT&T hacker, has decided to repeat the folly of the early closed Mac, the early closed NeXT, and even at times the Newton. Apple made a terrible choice in its partner, and seems incapable of realizing the potential of the iPhone.

  • by Slashcrap (869349) on Tuesday September 25 2007, @08:31AM (#20741497)
    Apparently the phone won't be disabled immediately. It will first make a call to the nearest AT&T NSA approved logging center, where the phone number will be recorded and your address details passed on to Apple.

    Then the phone will disable itself.

    Shortly after, you will meet with a mysterious accident.

    Apple users that we interviewed were of the opinion that while this was a good first step, it didn't really go quite far enough. "Ideally I'd like to see the offender's family murdered in the streets as well. It's really the only way to teach the proper respect for Apple's products and business strategy.", said one person who was soon copied by all the others in an attempt to show their individuality.

    An Apple spokesman who we contacted offered the following statement, "LOL, Windows, LOL!".
    • Re:Quiiiick. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by @madeus (24818) <slashdot_24818@mac.com> on Tuesday September 25 2007, @08:58AM (#20741767)

      and then threaten to turn them into paperweights if you dare to use them away from their selected few.
      No, they didn't. They are not talking about "bricking" only network-unlocked phones (the actual quote was in the context of hacked iPods too). You are spreading FUD, like most people are on this thread, and the flamers and moderators are lapping it up too.

      In fact, in Europe (I don't know about the US) phones *must* be unlockable (providers often refer to this a 'subsidy code' - it's cheaper to buy it from a third party). It can be around 3-4 UKP to buy a subsidy code (generated from your IMEI) online, it's usually about 10-20 UKP to get it done on the high street and about 50+ UKP to get one from the original provider.

      After the contract period is up on AT&T from what I have read I believe they are letting you use the device with other providers . I'm not sure if that is through legal mandate or not, as I've indicated I don't know what US legislation there is covering network interoperability for mobile phones.

      In either case their most certianly ARE going to be unlocked iPhones out there, that's not the issue. All that's being said here is that "if you've modified the software on your iPhone, upgrading it [i.e. applying a binary delta which is intend to patch against the original OS] might prevent the phone from booting". I would add that if you find that even remotely surprising you are not sufficiently technical to be messing around applying 3rd party hacks to your phone's OS (and that you can almost certainly restore the original firmware on it, even if it won't boot - as with the iPod's).

      Slashdot is mis-representing the truth and people who love an excuse to rant against Apple are lapping it up in blind ignorance.