Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Sunday February 11 2018, @03:15PM   Printer-friendly
from the so-I-guess-he-will-never-work-there dept.

A former Apple intern has been blamed for a leak of iOS source code. The intern reportedly distributed it to five friends in the iOS jailbreaking community, and the code eventually spread out of this group:

Earlier this week, a portion of iOS source code was posted online to GitHub, and in an interesting twist, a new report from Motherboard reveals that the code was originally leaked by a former Apple intern.

According to Motherboard, the intern who stole the code took it and distributed it to a small group of five friends in the iOS jailbreaking community in order to help them with their ongoing efforts to circumvent Apple's locked down mobile operating system. The former employee apparently took "all sorts of Apple internal tools and whatnot," according to one of the individuals who had originally received the code, including additional source code that was apparently not included in the initial leak.

The DMCA notice GitHub received from Apple that resulted in the takedown of the ZioShiba/iBoot repository.

Related:
Leak of iBoot Code to GitHub Could Potentially Help iPhone Jailbreakers.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Offtopic) by Arik on Monday February 12 2018, @12:47AM (3 children)

    by Arik (4543) on Monday February 12 2018, @12:47AM (#636517) Journal
    "Because the alternative is effectively taking a stance of "I think your position is wrong, therefor I will disregard your rights and opinions"."

    I will, when necessary, ignore your opinions. Not your rights. Very different things.

    You don't have a right to supervise what I do with my equipment, nor to allow or disallow me from using it as a I feel fit.

    If I bought it from you, you should have taken that into account before selling it.

    There is no right to retain ownership in things after you sold them - quite the opposite!
    --
    If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   -1  
       Offtopic=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Offtopic' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 1, Troll) by Marand on Monday February 12 2018, @01:08AM (2 children)

    by Marand (1081) on Monday February 12 2018, @01:08AM (#636522) Journal

    You don't have a right to supervise what I do with my equipment, nor to allow or disallow me from using it as a I feel fit.

    If I bought it from you, you should have taken that into account before selling it.

    There is no right to retain ownership in things after you sold them - quite the opposite!

    While I agree with you on this, it's entirely off-topic. This is a discussion about copyright violation and you're shoehorning in a rant about product ownership and what rights (if any) the seller has after the product is sold.

    • (Score: 2, Offtopic) by Arik on Monday February 12 2018, @01:54AM (1 child)

      by Arik (4543) on Monday February 12 2018, @01:54AM (#636528) Journal
      It's not off-topic it's in fact precisely on the bulls-eye of the target. This is about the property rights of the iphone owner versus the copyright privileges of the seller. Rights trump privileges.
      --
      If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
      • (Score: 1, Offtopic) by Marand on Monday February 12 2018, @06:47PM

        by Marand (1081) on Monday February 12 2018, @06:47PM (#636773) Journal

        This is about the property rights of the iphone owner versus the copyright privileges of the seller. Rights trump privileges.

        No, that's just more "ends justify the means" bullshit. There's no requirement to violate Apple's copyright to maintain your property rights as buyer, as evidenced by every other jailbreak that's been done without someone handing over the source. You don't have to, and shouldn't, disregard someone else's legal rights (whatever you may think of copyright, it's still legally recognised*) just because you don't like what they create with them. If you care about the right to do what you wish with what you purchase, this is the wrong way to go about doing it. (Of course, if you actually care about property rights you probably shouldn't be buying Apple products in the first place...)

        It's also still off topic to this comment thread, which was about whether copyright violation is theft or not. You can keep modding me troll for saying it, but it won't make your comments be on-topic. This entire tangent belongs in a different comment chain, not tacked onto this one to address your pet peeve. What you did is basically the same as whenever someone interjects "ahem, it's really GNU/Linux" into random Linux discussions: even if people agree, it's not the topic at hand and doesn't belong.

        * Of course, copyright durations are completely out of whack and the laws need changing to reduce copyright length and take back the public domain, but that's a different argument and a different fight that isn't applicable here.