Jailbreaking must be legal, but should you do it?
(First published on IT World Canada blog)
You will be hard pressed to find someone who find the practise of applying technology locks to someone elses property more reprehensible than I do. This is what I feel of the practise of companies like Apple and Sony who sell technology where they, not the owner, retain the keys to the technology and treat their owners as attackers of their own property. I believe that this practise should be clearly outlawed, while backward facing legislation such as the Conservative Bill C-32 seeks to legally protect it.
While this is true, I recommend against what has become the most common form of jailbreaking.
The USA has a less nasty version of legal protection of this business practise than the Conservative Bill C-32. As part of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), the U.S. Copyright office convenes a rule making process every three years. This round the Electronic Frontier Foundation proposed an exception for jailbreaking, which was granted. The most vocal opponent was Apple, which aggressively defended their business practises.
I have even less respect for Apple's position on this than EFF's Fred von Lohmann. If Apple wants to retain the keys for devices that they are distributing to other people, the law shouldforce them to be more honest than they have wanted to be thus far.
In order for the people possessing technology to be prohibited from changing the locks, theyshould be properly notified that they are not owners. It would be perfectly legitimate for Apple to retain ownership, and have people when they acquire Apple technology to sign a technology use agreement which lays out all the conditions of this arrangement. All the balance of contract and other law would exist in this relationship which has many more similarities to a rental agreement than apurchase agreement. Users of Apple technology would understand their rights and responsibilities in their relationship with Apple, and wouldn't be dishonestly confused into thinking that they were actually purchasing Apple hardware in the same sense as they might purchase other tangible goods.
Once Apple is forced by the legal system to be more honest, Apple technology users would be able to make better informed choices about whether they wish to sign onto such contractual arrangements. The markets would then be able to decide, something that this dishonest relationship misinformation (DRM) has thus far prohibited. Technology users have other options available to them under other contractual arrangements, each of which should require under adequately enforced Canadian law a level of transparency such that users are able to make informed choices. In Canada the body tasked with enforcement of competition, consumer packaging and labelling law is the Competition Bureau. This bureau should be given a strong mandate to enforce a minimum level of honesty on these companies.
When you unlock or jailbreak technology, there are a variety of reasons you may be doing so.
People who unlock their Sony PlayStation 3 are most often doing it so that they can install competing operating systems such as Linux which allows them to expand the functionality of the hardware. Installing a competing operating system was previously a feature supported by Sony. When Sony removed this feature, owners resorted not only to jailbreaking but also launching lawsuits against Sony.
On the other hand, many people are unlocking their iPhones so that they can install application software that has not been approved to be installed via the Apple appstore on iTunes.
When you unlock a device to install a competing operating system, you receive all the benefits of this new environment including the security patches and other critical updates. When you unlock a device, but keep the original operating system, you end up with an inherently insecure system as you are now in a battle not only with third party attackers but also your security vendor.
When the U.S. Copyright office clarified that jailbreaking didn't constitute circumvention under their DMCA, a number of websites launched that would allow you to jailbreak your iPad, iPhone and iPod Touch. These sites made use of security vulnerabilities in Apples iOS, which when discovered Apple will quickly fix.
Think about this: In order to be able to jailbreak your iOS you are making use of flaws in the software, which the software vendor is going to fix once discovered. If you keep unpatched software around, you are then running a computer — often actively accessing and accessible by the Internet– which has known security vulnerabilities. If you keep your operating system patches up-to-date, the activity critically recommended for any computer that is network connected, then the jailbreaking of your device keeps being re-locked.
This is a no-win situation, and one that should be avoided.
I believe people need to take this into consideration, and make use of alternatives.
Purchase hardware where the vendor offers you an arrangement that you are happy with. In my case I run hardware that is compatible with, or preferably shipped withFree/Libre and Open Source Software (FLOSS) operating systems. My desktops and servers all run traditional Linux distributions such as CentOS and Ubuntu, and mycell phone runs Android.
If you do unlock a device, replace the operating system and other software such that you end up with a properly secure system. Do not retain the original operating system whose vendor then becomes an attacker against your device, one with intimate knowledge of how the system works.
Whatever hardware and software choices you make, please get involved in the legal issues. Please ensure that your member of parliament knows you oppose the legalization and legal protection of these business practises. Currently this means amendments to Bill C-32, or otherwise rejecting the bills passing. On BillC32.ca we have a FAQ where you can learn more, and a form letter you can send to your MP to make your viewsheard.
—
Russell McOrmond is a self employed consultant, policy coordinator for CLUE:Canada's Association for Free/Libre and Open Source Software, co-coordinator for Getting Open Source Logic INto Governments (GOSLING), and host for DigitalCopyright Canada.