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 should
force 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, they
should 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 a
purchase 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
device, 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 app
store 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 with
Free/Libre and Open Source Software (FLOSS) operating systems. My
desktops and servers all run traditional Linux distributions such as
CentOS and Ubuntu, and my
cell 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 views
heard.
---
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 Digital
Copyright Canada.
