How to remove dropout jeep

TJBUSMC1973 wrote:

There is no way that I know of to remotely modify or access an iOS device that is not jailbroken. Period.

Fixed that for you.

TJBUSMC1973 wrote:

I love it when they misquote a document when they're so eager to prove a point. It's entertaining!

I'm not entirely sure it's willful misquoting. People are obviously scared and jumping to conclusions like jumping beans under a sun lamp.

Kel.mgk wrote:

TJBUSMC1973 wrote:

There is no way that I know of to remotely modify or access an iOS device that is not jailbroken. Period.

Fixed that for you.

As that is not what TJBUSMC1973 said, quoting him and implying that it is is a falsehood. It's much less funny than you think.

Kel.mgk wrote:

TJBUSMC1973 wrote:

There is no way that I know of to remotely modify or access an iOS device that is not jailbroken. Period.

Fixed that for you.

Feel free to provide proof of such a method. So far, there is none.

It's okay. Some people don't understand that the burden of proof is always on the claimant.

Claim: It is possible to remotely access a non-jailbroken iOS device.

Proof: .... .... .... .... none.

Conclusion: This is a spurious claim, and should be ignored, until such time as validated and reproducible proof is tendered.

In other words, let's use the scientific method. Provide evidence, which can be reproduced by an independent party. Until then, it's not even a theory. It's a hypothesis.

cca 2008 (iOS 4.0) comex?

but actually in this case you're right.

TJBUSMC1973 wrote:

Kel.mgk wrote:

TJBUSMC1973 wrote:

There is no way that I know of to remotely modify or access an iOS device that is not jailbroken. Period.

Fixed that for you.

Feel free to provide proof of such a method. So far, there is none.

Can you provide 100% proof that there is no method?

So far there is none..

Sorry if I'm coming off as a jerk, but everyone seems so solid in their opinions and knowlegde here.. and the fact is none of us know for fact, what can and can't be done.

You seem 100% certain, to the point that my mere suggestion that there is an exploit you don't know of, has offended you and Meg above..

how is everyone so certain that there is no exploit?

Kel.mgk wrote:

Can you provide 100% proof that there is no method?

It's logically impossible to prove a negative proposition.

You seem 100% certain, to the point that my mere suggestion that there is an exploit you don't know of, has offended you and Meg above..

No, what offended me was your method of doing so.

Meg St._Clair wrote:

Kel.mgk wrote:

Can you provide 100% proof that there is no method?

It's logically impossible to prove a negative proposition.

You seem 100% certain, to the point that my mere suggestion that there is an exploit you don't know of, has offended you and Meg above..

No, what offended me was your method of doing so.

oh please, I clearly stated I fixed his quote, and bolded my edit.

I'm sorry, but that's the most accurate way anyone can start or end any sentance in this thread ..

" as far as I know " unless they work for Apple or NSA , and even then, both are compartmentalized by design..

The fact that a jail break can exist shows a vulnerabilty, I don't care if its needs to be physically accessed or not, it's enough to show me there are holes in the system that apple was unaware of and these holes can exist in any interface

Bluetooth, wifi, sync, anything.. Just because "the public" is unaware of them does not mean they do not exist, so perhaps we should accept the fact that indeed, it is possible that more is going on than we know.

I imagine the ( all ) devices comes with access preinstalled anyway, and we're arguing over a moot point.

Message was edited by: Kel.mgk grammer - thanks guy below.

I rather think that it's a moot point, even if it isn't

If it is a mute point please turn your volume up.

NSA Language Inspectorate.

Kel.mgk said:

"The fact that a jail break can exist shows a vulnerabilty, I don't care if its needs to be physically accessed or not, it's enough to show me there are holes in the system that apple was unaware of and these holes can exist in any interface."

No, it does not show that at all. Jailbreaking, except for the purpose of unlocking in the US, is not illegal. You are not modifying or hacking the OS that is present you are entirely replacing it. You can then use this new OS to introduce malware, load unapproved apps, etc. I can also buy an Intel based computer, say a cheap Windows based system, and replace Windows with Linux.

Can you provide 100% proof that there is no method?

As Meg says, asking for that proof is a logical fallacy. It's not possible to provide such proof.

Obviously none of us can say that it's impossible for there to be a remote access method on an iPhone. However, security on the iPhone is quite good, and there is no known remote access method at this time. I've been involved in the security community for a while now, and I can tell you will full confidence that if any security companies know about such a thing, they're keeping it a secret... which is really not the way they work. Most security companies out there are quite happy to blow the whistle on any kind of corporate or government spyware.

So, since there's absolutely no evidence in favor of a remote access vulnerability, the burden of proof falls on those claiming it exists. One cannot be taken seriously when claiming that it exists while refusing to supply any evidence for those claims.

After all, we don't say things like "You can't prove that Bigfoot doesn't exist, therefore he exists."

thomas_r. wrote:

Obviously none of us can say that it's impossible for there to be a remote access method on an iPhone.

Then stop saying it, cause it's been said 200 times in 12 pages.

That was my point.

Thanks.

It's Impossible to say whether I will live for 200 years or not, but I won't count on it.

Then stop saying it, cause it's been said 200 times in 12 pages.

No, actually, that's not what anyone has been saying.