However this:
> Once a device no longer receives updates or official support, it should be opened for hobbyists to experiment with.
I agree with and I’d support legislation to that effect.
The hardware is fine, well-built and solid, probably still has 50% battery life left at this point. It's not the fastest device, but plenty fast for text and 2D graphics, plus some mild 3D.
But Apple has cut off support, very few apps can run on the old version of iOS it is locked to, and there is no real way of installing a different OS or adding a third-party app store or sideloading apps. Even with a paid developer account, you're severely limited.
That is actively killing off a device that could still be viable and usable to a lot of people, thus planned/deliberate obsolescence.
If this problem hadn’t been solved, there would be more of an issue, but my 6 year old iPad Pro runs everything and is still fully supported.
Having said that I actually do agree that unsupported hardware in general should be opened to new OS installs at the end of official support.
It is still a perfectly viable piece of hardware for many uses, no matter how much technology has improved.
That is deliberate, but has nothing to do with planned obsolescence.
Opening up the original iPad to other operating systems and/or DIY software does not mean handing over the signing keys for currently supported platforms. In case of a running iPad, an Apple-authorized update could be pushed to the OS to unlock it and allow it to run binaries directly.
Apple could also document any hardware features that would allow someone to put an iPad into "free-for-all" mode. Presumably this would require opening up the device to attach a serial cable to a JTAG connection or something similar.
There are many options for Apple to open up unsupported devices for hobbyists to tinker on, and it would completely in line in the original hacker-friendly Apple spirit.
Instead Apple refuses to do so, and insist that opening up an 11 year old, long unsupported device, by claiming that it would somehow compromise their current security model.
> In case of a running iPad, an Apple-authorized update could be pushed to the OS to unlock it and allow it to run binaries directly.
Which of course an attacker would be able to do too.
> Apple could also document any hardware features that would allow someone to put an iPad into "free-for-all" mode. Presumably this would require opening up the device to attach a serial cable to a JTAG connection or something similar.
Which of course a police department, the FBI, or the agents of an oppressive regime or anyone who bought a JTAG device off ebay would be able to do too.
These are exactly the reasons they don’t do these things - if they did, they would be opening attack vectors.
Security is hard. I’m not saying it’s impossible to achieve this, but it’s not simple.
Opening up access to install your own software would have great potential to increase the security of the device, not least because you can actually run current and patched versions of any software.
What you're arguing for is security by obscurity.
Nobody is talking about security through obscurity. This is about not introducing easily explored weaknesses into all devices, supported or not.
Open the hardware, use secure software and keep your storage encrypted, preferably on removable storage.
This is complete bullshit.
iOS devices use an SOC so there is no way to ‘tap the memory bus’ without destroying the processor.
iOS decides do in fact resist access even when they are in the hands of an adversary.
Also it seems like you don’t know that the storage on iOS devices is already encrypted.
This is a straw man - nobody said ‘impervious’.
You said this:
> If you have physical access to a device, you can already tap the memory bus or countless other places
It is complete bullshit.
If it wasn’t, you’d be able to post a link to someone doing it.
If you think that is the only way into an Apple device, and that police or even nation states are now helpless against the mighty "hack resistant" iPhone, then you may be interested in this bridge I happen to have for sale.
I presume you know that isn’t an example of someone “tapping the memory bus”, which seems to be still just bullshit.
Yes, security flaws exist.
Generally we close them, not argue for abandoning security altogether as you are doing.
Police generally are helpless against the iPhone.
Nation states may well not be, but it is still going to cost them a lot.
Your argument - that because nation states can compromise the iPhone, we should make it so everyone can, seems very odd.
Any closed platform that becomes unsupported and stays locked down is made artificially obsolete.
I can buy an original IBM PC, write my own software and run it with no limitations, despite it being an unsupported platform for several decades. See the famous 8088 MPH demo for an example of how much can still be done on an ancient platform, way beyond what was considered possible in its heyday. I can even write my own OS and run that. Remember that Linux was originally written by Linus Torvalds because there was no freely available Unix-like on x86, so he decided to write his own.
I can't do that with an original iPhone. You can jailbreak it, but that's not a risk-free process and it still doesn't let you install your own OS or give you direct access to the hardware.
Once a device no longer receives updates or official support, it should be opened for hobbyists to experiment with.