http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/ Engadget Comments for http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/Mar 25th 2010 2:42AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/
Who needs viruses on apple products when you can just exploit them!! Something Apple is fluent with.]]>Mar 25th 2010 2:51AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/Mar 25th 2010 3:35AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/troll much ?]]>Mar 25th 2010 4:54AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/Mar 25th 2010 9:42AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/Mar 25th 2010 9:43AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/Now Apple and Apple customers will get a taste of what it's like to be the most popular OS on a platform. Security through obscurity is definitely not a factor with the iPhone.]]>Mar 25th 2010 9:51AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/"most" secure is still up for debate, but no one ever said "completely" secure. Thanks for playing.]]>Mar 25th 2010 9:54AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/Mar 25th 2010 10:28AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/Mar 25th 2010 11:03AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/1.Harder to exploit devices
2.Based on a Cracked article i laughed over, but then was afraid afterwards,(www.cracked.com/article_18377_5-reasons-you-should-be-scared-apple.html) that number one reason seems like that would be implremented in a way like this...(but like reverse.)]]>Mar 25th 2010 12:22PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/I read that a while ago, scared me too, mainly because it takes apples 'strong points' and blows them to shit, didnt some guy kill himself after being accused of stealing a prototype iphone and his family was threatened?

even so, nice reality checks like these keep apple fanboys in place :)
all it takes is someone willing to hack apple products and look what happens]]>Mar 25th 2010 1:39PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/Don't try to change your game plan now. Just suck it up & everything will be alright.]]>Mar 26th 2010 6:19AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/Mar 25th 2010 2:46AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/Mar 25th 2010 2:48AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/I think they did a good job. No need to sugar coat it.]]>Mar 25th 2010 2:59AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/Nah. Microsoft helps keep CrApple afloat just to avoid anti-trust suits. Without CrApple, MS would have almost 100% of the computing market and and that would cause it problems.

Just lket CrApple keep shooting themselves in the foot, smile and keep using products that actually have worth.]]>Mar 25th 2010 4:38AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/
See in your earlier post, where you used 'CrApple'. It may have raised a wry smile. Continuing to use it, 3 times in this post, makes you sound like a trolling tool. Just saying.]]>Mar 25th 2010 5:57AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/Mar 25th 2010 11:23PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/
no versus know

No, used as a function word to express the negative of an alternative choice or possibility
Know, to be aware of the truth or factuality of : be convinced or certain of b : to have a practical understanding of

Now you know, and knowing is half the battle. GI JOE!]]>Mar 26th 2010 1:51PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/Mar 25th 2010 2:46AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/]]>Mar 25th 2010 2:47AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/Mar 25th 2010 2:59AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/
Now that would be a HUGE ad campaign idea for MSFT! or PCs in general!

Someone should make a vid for youtube!]]>Mar 25th 2010 3:05AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/
So the security systems Apple has in place did limit the exposure here. Windows Vista/7 have similar controls. XP does too, but almost no one uses them.]]>Mar 25th 2010 3:08AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/Mar 25th 2010 3:11AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/Mar 25th 2010 3:14AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/"and you can actually play games on it"
Macs are meant for people who want to work, not fuck around.]]>Mar 25th 2010 3:15AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/
actually, macs are for people who want to fuck around but call what they are doing work]]>Mar 25th 2010 3:37AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/Mar 25th 2010 3:38AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/Mar 25th 2010 6:43AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/
I guess the 30 servers, and various Cisco devices, VoIP systems, etc. I support using a Mac isn't work...I'll be sure to let my boss know they're paying for nothing...]]>Mar 25th 2010 6:46AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/Mar 25th 2010 8:50AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/
Apple has many less threats to worry about overall as most hackers go after the majority marketshare. OS X has a relatively secure design but windows is more battle-tested which is also why you hear about more security risks for it. Thinking you are safe just because of your OS is inviting disaster no matter what OS you're using.]]>Mar 25th 2010 9:54AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/
On the flip side, I know a couple engineers, professors who use Macs.
...of course they run Windows on them to do *actual* work, but still.]]>Mar 25th 2010 1:19PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/what I had meant is that regardless of what safeguards are built onto a system, it's only as good as the people that use use. Read up on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Mitnick
False sense of security is worse then no security. Many Apple users wrongly believe that they are immune to breaches, after all, that's what the commercials say. So, many of those users don't practice safe computing, they'll click on anything that comes along. Since their system can't possible by hacked in.]]>Mar 25th 2010 4:21PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/Mar 25th 2010 2:49AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/It doesn't matter. If Apple wants to say how much more secure they are (especially against Windows) then they should get to work]]>Mar 25th 2010 2:55AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/"In the iPhone sandbox, Weinmann said there’s a non-root user called ‘mobile’ with certain user privileges. “With this exploit, I can do anything that ‘mobile’ can do."”

Yeah they did leave some stuff out. It sounds even worse now.]]>Mar 25th 2010 2:59AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/
Who cares. This is the third time in a row Safari's had its shit shoved in. That's kind of embarrassing.]]>Mar 25th 2010 3:29AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/
You might expect Engadget to revise the title but nah... gotta bait the Apple haters :P]]>Mar 25th 2010 3:30AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/
And since these browsers are complex pieces of code it's unlikely they'll ever be completely vulnerability-free. And once Chrome becomes significant enough to attack, due to market share or due to reward size, it'll happen to it too.]]>Mar 25th 2010 3:54AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/
Every browser is vulnerable to something, usually accessed via a link to a malicious web site. Every browser. EVERY SINGLE ONE. Stop bitching about it like Safari is the only one.]]>Mar 25th 2010 4:07AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/
I absolutely agree. The "iPhone Hacked in 20-Seconds" is just sensationalist journalism that is lapped up by the anti-Apple brigade. Yes, it is important news, and Apple clearly has to take action, but the sky is not about to fall in and I feel no more worried about using my 3GS today as I did yesterday.

The chances are that you could respin this article to something like "iPhone Hacked By Toddler" or "iPhone Hacked By Domestic Cat" if all they had to do was push a button to implement a vulnerability that took weeks of development time and everything to use it was ready and waiting.

Ultimately, I pay no attention to these competitions because they don't bare any resemblance to the "real world".]]>Mar 25th 2010 4:49AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/
He work out 2 weeks to hack a phone in 20 seconds job. I believe that from now on every iPhone is submitted to be hacked in 20 seconds.
Each 20 second an iPhone is hacked. Every 13 second a child .... ]]>Mar 25th 2010 4:54AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/
I totally agree. That's why we should all agree Macs aren't inherently any more secure than PCs.

I expect Apple will realise this and modify their marketing campaigns accordingly.

Aha. Aha. Aha.]]>Mar 25th 2010 2:32PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/I wonder what would happen if the same test is done with Android, as both are using Webkit based browsers.]]>Mar 25th 2010 2:50AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/
Read the article. It hints at what it uses to exploit. The webkit's implementation has nothing to do with how safari stacks and implements client-side exploits. Two entirely different systems.]]>Mar 25th 2010 2:56AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/Mar 25th 2010 3:00AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/25/iphone-sms-database-hacked-in-20-seconds-news-at-11/Using that logic, my PC running Google Chrome is in trouble too!

Fortunately, it doesn't work like that.]]>Mar 25th 2010 3:02AM