Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Metasploit 3.7 Hacks Apple iOS

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the your-choice-of-options dept.

IOS 68

An anonymous reader writes "HD Moore is at it again. This time the famous open source security researcher has set his sights on exploiting Apple iOS. The Metasploit 3.7 release includes 35 new attack modules in total."

cancel ×

68 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

It's time (3, Insightful)

symbolset (646467) | more than 3 years ago | (#36055090)

Now that Apple has garnered hacker interest, let's see how they do.

Re:It's time (3)

RuiFerreira (791654) | more than 3 years ago | (#36055280)

In fact I'm curious about this too. The iphone/itunes link means that you can infect one and get the other as bonus. Additionally phones give more vectors of infection. You carry them around and connect them to several different networks. This has to be appealing for exploiters(tm).

Re:It's time (0)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 3 years ago | (#36055802)

Because Apple hasn't attracted any interest in the past decade during its meteoric rise in popularity ? Please. The year of the "Mac Attacks" had been coming for almost as long as the year of the Linux desktop.

Re:It's time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36055914)

The year of the "Mac Attacks"

We're not talking about Macs, we're talking about phones.

Re:It's time (3, Informative)

mjwx (966435) | more than 3 years ago | (#36056106)

Because Apple hasn't attracted any interest in the past few years during its moderate rise in popularity?

There, fixed that for you. Apple's have only gotten out of the 2% of computers in the last 2 or 3 years. Even now they struggle to get 5% worldwide.

Now back onto topic, as a clued in /.er will always point out, malware is a business and business take a long time to react to changes in the marketplace. Malware attacks on phones are new, very new as there was
A) Never a market for phone malware.
B) Phones were never powerful enough to be useful.
C) Too many different types of phones to make any attack worthwhile. Cost would have been way too high to get every single Symbian model out there.

Take note of the last one. IOS drops that cost a lot, making malware on phones economically viable. Further more, IOS has proven itself to be quite vulnerable in the past, you do know that jailbreaking is done by exploiting a vulnerability dont you. Feel free to use the "jailbreak me" PDF vulnerability as an example. The only reason it hasn't been exploited is because there's more profit in Windows malware.

Claiming you are automagically protected when you've never even been attacked is naive at best. It's like Lisa's (Simpson) tiger repelling rock, you cant use the fact that there are no tigers around the rock as proof of it's tiger repelling abilities.

Re:It's time (-1)

digitallife (805599) | more than 3 years ago | (#36056662)

The PDF exploit was patched in 10 days. All software has bugs and vectors of exploit, saying that a given platform has some is not interesting. Whats of interest is whether those exploits can practically be used for malicious purposes. So far it is almost unheard of on iOS. Considering that Android has had plenty of malware and Trojans, I think it is significant that iOS has had very few.

Also, you may want to brush up on modern OS usage numbers: Mac OS X has been rising steadily and quickly and is over 7% and iOS is around 2.5% (total web usage)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems [wikipedia.org]

Re:It's time (1)

CharlyFoxtrot (1607527) | more than 3 years ago | (#36057984)

Apple's have only gotten out of the 2% of computers in the last 2 or 3 years. Even now they struggle to get 5% worldwide.

This Ars Technica article [arstechnica.com] has Apple at 10% market share in the US, this one [pingdom.com] has it at 14%. That's a lot of macs. Apple is one of the few companies that have consistently seen their market share grow the last few years in a floundering market.

Then there's Apple's strength in certain niches, like on college campuses [dailyprincetonian.com] :

"According to the Office of Information Technology (OIT), 45 percent of computers purchased this year were Macs, more than in any previous year. In 2003, when this year's seniors arrived on campus, just 15 percent of them chose Macs. The next year, a quarter of incoming freshmen did, and the year after that, 38 percent."

That's a 2006 article and personally I have seen no reversal of that trend, quite the opposite actually. And you'd expect colleges to be hotspots of all kinds of mischief like hacking and exploits.

Take note of the last one. IOS drops that cost a lot, making malware on phones economically viable. Further more, IOS has proven itself to be quite vulnerable in the past, you do know that jailbreaking is done by exploiting a vulnerability dont you. Feel free to use the "jailbreak me" PDF vulnerability as an example. The only reason it hasn't been exploited is because there's more profit in Windows malware.

iOS has had a few exploits and yet we've had only 1 or 2 actual (and amateurish) attacks out in the wild impacting very few people (only jailbreakers with default passwords.) Only twice has there been a remote exploit and both were promptly patched by Apple, the rest have been pretty complicated hacks that require reinstalling the device or putting it in recovery mode. That's a pretty good security record, as good as any device or OS out there.

I don't buy your explanation that it's not economically viable. 120 million of these devices have been sold, mostly to reasonably well off people. That's a huge "market" for exploits.

Claiming you are automagically protected when you've never even been attacked is naive at best. It's like Lisa's (Simpson) tiger repelling rock, you cant use the fact that there are no tigers around the rock as proof of it's tiger repelling abilities.

That's not what I said, no-one claims macs are "magically immune". What I said was that people have been predicting a deluge of viruses and malware for mac for a decade now and it hasn't happened. Sooner or later they might be right, just like the people who say "repent, the end is nigh" might be right someday. In the mean time rehashing old arguments that haven't actually been proven to be true in reality is a waste of time. Reality is the ultimate test of the theory.

Re:It's time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36069002)

This Ars Technica article [arstechnica.com] has Apple at 10% market share in the US

which - translated to worldwide - is roughly Microsoft's smartphone marketshare. And i thought they were doing badly...you sure proved me and a lot of others wrong.

That's a lot of macs.

and the titanic was pretty big...until you compare it to the size of the moon.

I don't buy your explanation that it's not economically viable. 120 million of these devices have been sold, mostly to reasonably well off people. That's a huge "market" for exploits.

again, it might look big, but it's comparatively tiny next to the alternatives.

That's a pretty good security record, as good as any device or OS out there.

come on, how is a bug that allowed remote code to change the core OS just by visiting a webpage part of a 'good security record'? what other mobile OS has had a bug that bad?

What I said was that people have been predicting a deluge of viruses and malware for mac for a decade now and it hasn't happened.

people are predicting it will happen once they gain more than a pithy share of the market.

Re:It's time (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36060004)

This is off-topic, of course, but I want to chime in. I predict that Apple is about to see a meteoric rise in popularity for their desktop operating system. I have been using Ubuntu since Windows 98 stopped getting security updates, July 2006. In my latest computer upgrade, I decided to try OS X because I have found my iPod and iPad so easy to use (and I wanted to run iTunes). I built a hackintosh with the feeling that I could just install Ubuntu if it didn't work out.

I hated it. I couldn't get used to anything - the dock, what happens when you minimize, command-tab and command-`, closing windows not actually quitting the application, and on and on. Then I learned the rule when my wife asked me why Word starts quickly sometimes, but other times it's slow to start: just click. Just click. The computer works it out. If you have too many applications running because you have been closing windows without quitting, don't worry about it. Memory's cheap, and the program text can be removed by the VMM anyway. Just click. Can't find the actual files for your photos now that they've been imported into iPhoto? Why do you care, as long as you can see them, print them, mail them, whatever? Just click. Think it's weird to have a single menu bar that's not even on the application window. Stop thinking - just click.

Now, I love the damned thing. This bloody abomination could really catch on.

Re:It's time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36056820)

Fuck you Macfag.

Re:It's time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36056906)

lol, Problem?

You have no idea how fucking hard I just got seeing your reaction.

Metasploit 3.7 Hacks Apple iOS (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36055106)

No, it doesn't.
It just has something to do after you broke in yourself now.

Re:Metasploit 3.7 Hacks Apple iOS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36055162)

Mod parent up. And considering that social engineering is one of the most popular ways of exploiting a system, it is going to be pretty damn hard to do on iOS.

Re:Metasploit 3.7 Hacks Apple iOS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36055248)

Yup. It seems like Slashdot has resorted to "Foxnews"-ing Apple stories for clicks....

Re:Metasploit 3.7 Hacks Apple iOS (1)

silanea (1241518) | more than 3 years ago | (#36055294)

Maybe /. should introduce a new channel for those news. They could call it "iDle" then.

Re:Metasploit 3.7 Hacks Apple iOS (4, Interesting)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 3 years ago | (#36055202)

FTFA:

"The post-exploitation modules (post for short) are designed to run on systems that were compromised through another vector, whether its social engineering, a guessed password, or an unpatched vulnerability," HD Moore, Rapid7 chief security officer and Metasploit chief architect told InternetNews.com. "This module requires iTunes to be installed and for a backend to be accessible that has not been encrypted."

Correct. Slashvertisements are annoying enough, at least they should be reasonably accurate. This one falls into the "sensationalist blurb" category.

Re:Metasploit 3.7 Hacks Apple iOS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36056262)

It is only "sensationalist blurb" if it isn't about Microsoft, since Apple is the new Microsoft [slashdot.org] this headline must be a fact.

Re:Metasploit 3.7 Hacks Apple iOS (1)

pspahn (1175617) | more than 3 years ago | (#36055954)

I wish I knew what this +5 insightful comment meant.

Re:Metasploit 3.7 Hacks Apple iOS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36056544)

I wish I knew what this +5 insightful comment meant.

RTFA and you'll understand GP's post.

Re:Metasploit 3.7 Hacks Apple iOS (1)

pspahn (1175617) | more than 3 years ago | (#36056604)

It's the "broke in yourself now" part that I'm having trouble parsing.

Re:Metasploit 3.7 Hacks Apple iOS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36058308)

It's the "broke in yourself now" part that I'm having trouble parsing.

Basically, you have to have already compromised the machine on your own (knew their password, got them to click a link, etc..). The new releases won't help you break into the machine, just makes playing around on it after the fact easier.

Re:Metasploit 3.7 Hacks Apple iOS (1)

Gilmoure (18428) | more than 3 years ago | (#36071578)

Wait, you're telling me hackers have figured out that, if they have a password to a system, they can do stuff on that system? O. M. G. They're gonna be running nuts over all sorts of computers and systems out there.

Re:Metasploit 3.7 Hacks Apple iOS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36058710)

I wish I knew it would have got +5 Insightful. I would have logged in.

Re:Metasploit 3.7 Hacks Apple iOS (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 3 years ago | (#36060638)

Darn. I thought there were 35 ways to jailbreak the iPhones these days. Perhaps one of them would work on the iPad2 (which is still lacking a jailbreak).

(Jailbreaking relies on vulnerabilities typically)

Sites, Sights (3, Informative)

mikael_j (106439) | more than 3 years ago | (#36055110)

"Set his sites"? really?

Re:Sites, Sights (0)

phopon (977751) | more than 3 years ago | (#36055132)

perhaps they mean "websites"... although in reality it is probably just a typo.

Re:Sites, Sights (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36055238)

Illiteracy != typo

Please stop misusing the word typo; it means typographic error, not a sad ignorance of the language you are using to communicate.

Re:Sites, Sights (1)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 3 years ago | (#36055852)

Not ignorance... carelessness.. It's happening all over the place now... I find more errors like this on mainstream news sites every day. Professional writers are getting as sloppy as your average Slashdot poster.

Re:Sites, Sights (1)

pspahn (1175617) | more than 3 years ago | (#36056626)

If there isn't a red squiggly underneath, nothing is wrong.

Damn you! DAMN YOU TO HELL! (2)

RichiH (749257) | more than 3 years ago | (#36055178)

Damn you for implying that timothy should proof-read submissions! Heretic!

Re:Sites, Sights (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36055286)

Semantics? Really?

Re:Sites, Sights (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36055354)

No it's language, fool! Speak it properly. Spell it properly. Use the correct words. In this case it's "set his [gun] sights on..."

Re:Sites, Sights (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36055378)

Did your mom ever tell you not to look directly into the son?

Re:Sites, Sights (1)

cbiltcliffe (186293) | more than 3 years ago | (#36057840)

Did you're mom ever tell you knot two luck directly into the son?

FTFY.

Re:Sites, Sights (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36059244)

>luck directly into the son.

You think that "look" and "luck" are homophones? Really?

Re:Sites, Sights (1)

cbiltcliffe (186293) | more than 3 years ago | (#36077694)

>luck directly into the son.

You think that "look" and "luck" are homophones? Really?

You're concerned about "look" and "luck", but not "two" and "to"? Really?

That being said, look/luck depends where you're from, and hence, what accent you speak with.

Re:Sites, Sights (1)

eriqk (1902450) | more than 3 years ago | (#36065510)

Did your mom ever tell you not to look directly into the son?

She did.
So once when I was six, I did. At first the brightness was overwhelming, but I had seen that before. I kept looking, forcing myself not to blink, and then the brightness began to dissolve. My pupils shrunk to pinholes and everything came into focus and for a moment I understood.

Re:Sites, Sights (5, Funny)

bmo (77928) | more than 3 years ago | (#36055386)

Let's eat, Grandpa!
Let's eat Grandpa!

Grammar saves lives.

--
BMO

Re:Sites, Sights (1)

mdaitc (619734) | more than 3 years ago | (#36055574)

If gram-mar (grandma?) were there, she could too!

Re:Sites, Sights (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36057058)

And add ignorance about what the word "semantics" means.

Re:Sites, Sights (1)

Gilmoure (18428) | more than 3 years ago | (#36071592)

It's that big company that screwed over Ripley?

Re:Sites, Sights (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36055334)

'merican spellar gud!

Re:Sites, Sights (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36055350)

The advent of spellcheck allows semi-retarded people to appear marginally intelligent. Except in cases like these. Without spellcheck, Timothy would be fucking things up every third word.

Re:Sites, Sights (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36055722)

's/spellcheck/spelling checker/'

Re:Sites, Sights (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36056288)

Good one, you sure had everybody roaring with laughter. So what's the verb form for "spelling checker"? "I am spelling checkering my document"?

Yes, spelling checkering is sure to gain common usage any time now.

Re:Sites, Sights (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36056752)

Verbing wierds language.

The verb is "to check" and you could just check (v.) the spelling, or run (v.) the spelling checker (n). like a normal person.

What are you doing on this site anyway? A real slashdotter would have flamed for the missing global in the substitution rather than raising a weak "spelling checkering" straw man argument.

Re:Sites, Sights (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36057674)

"Spelling checker" returns 557,000 Ghits
"Spell check" returns 9,777,000 Ghits
"Spellcheck" returns 10,100,000 Ghits

It would seem that "Spelling checker" is a rather archaic and cumbersome way of decribing "Spellcheck", and it's not in common usage. Like it or not, common usage dictates the development of the English language, rather than the other way around. In fact, dictionary.com is already listing "spell-check" as a verb.

The spell-check /spltk/ Show Spelled
[spel-chek] Show IPA

–verb (used with object)
1. to process (a document) with a spell checker; check the spelling of.
–noun Also, spell check .
2. a check for misspellings by using a spell checker.

And I'm not a real slashdotter, and have no geek card to hand in. That's why I don't have a slashdot account. The comments on this site are sometimes insightful, but you are correct in asking what I'm doing on this site. I lurk and occasionally post a comment when I'm drunk - hardly a good use of my time.

So in conclusion, I agree with you.

Re:Sites, Sights (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36058762)

I lurk and occasionally post a comment when I'm drunk - hardly a good use of my time.

Considering I mistyped "weird" in my last post, I could probably say the same. I should be working to improve my spelling rather than quibbling on the internet about what to call the software function that corrects it.

Re:Sites, Sights (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36061832)

Me too, I just post while UIB (under influence of beers) and I thought we all did it, other wise how to explain all this nonsense.

Re:Sites, Sights (1)

cbiltcliffe (186293) | more than 3 years ago | (#36057874)

The advent of spelling checker allows semi-retarded people to appear marginally intelligent. Except in cases like these. Without spelling checker, Timothy would be fucking things up every third word.

Really? That reads like one of those Google search results where some bot on a clickthrough search site fits a common search query into the phrase "Find _____ on eBay!"

Find start date of WWI on eBay!
Find natural hair colour Britney Spears on eBay!
Find Microsoft Exchange vulnerability on eBay!

Re:Sites, Sights (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36055410)

"Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4"

what idiocy is this?

Not an iOS Exploit In And Of Itself (4, Informative)

rsmith-mac (639075) | more than 3 years ago | (#36055182)

The Apple iOS Backup File Extraction module however is not an attack vector for directly exploiting iOS. Rather it is what is known as a post-exploitation module.

"The post-exploitation modules (post for short) are designed to run on systems that were compromised through another vector, whether its social engineering, a guessed password, or an unpatched vulnerability," HD Moore, Rapid7 chief security officer and Metasploit chief architect told InternetNews.com. "This module requires iTunes to be installed and for a backend to be accessible that has not been encrypted."

If I'm reading this right, the "exploit" is that Metasploit can now read unencrypted backups. I'm not sure how this is an exploit (the backup DB format isn't much of a secret), but there you go.

If you want a real exploit, look into the "i0n1c" exploit being used to jailbreak phones on the latest OS.

Re:Not an iOS Exploit In And Of Itself (2)

joh (27088) | more than 3 years ago | (#36055682)

If you want a real exploit, look into the "i0n1c" exploit being used to jailbreak phones on the latest OS.

Exactly. It's not that there are no iOS exploits out in the wild. As far as I know there's no remote exploit out there, though. You need physical access to the device or its backup (and then restore from that which requires physical access).

'Hack' ? I don't think so.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36055298)

Since when does the ability to extract an unprotected archive format count as hacking? I'll have to remember that when I next double click a .zip file and WinRAR opens it. I'll officially be a hacker then! :D

Re:'Hack' ? I don't think so.... (1)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 3 years ago | (#36056574)

Since when does the ability to extract an unprotected archive format count as hacking?

Hack, Hackers, Hacking - those words have lost their original meaning (much like Expert has).

Wow, really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36055396)

Timothy, want another exclusive? I cracked house security. My neighbour left his front door open, and I found out how to open his fridge and take some ham!

Have you just stopped reading the stuff you post?

HAM?!? (1)

alex67500 (1609333) | more than 3 years ago | (#36057978)

If I opened my neighbours fridge, I'd start by taking his beers!

Enough of this Apple stuff already (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36055426)

In terms of marketing and product design, I give them an "A-".

In terms of good citizenship in the computing community, I give Apple a "D-".

1. Assemble commodity hardware, make it look pretty,
2. Play on people's emotional-social needs and fears of computers (i.e. appeal to sense of belonging, user-friendliness),
3. Beg/borrow/steal Free software (be sure to act surprised and/or indignant when points out a GPL violation [gnumonks.org] ) and
4. Mark it way up.

They've certainly innovated, but their biggest innovations are the ones that allow them to become ever more proprietary and aggressive in their approach. They're a throwback to the 1980s, where fragmentation characterized the industry. Drunk with power, their ultimate vision for computing is a fully Apple-vetted "app store" for all their devices, allowing them to dictate what gets installed, and to scrape a commission from every application out there.

The more closed, the better.

It's mildly surprising that "joe six pack" has fallen for this, but it's simply demoralizing that supposedly intelligent and reasonable people have fallen for the hype. I guess giving you a unix-like system with a terminal window is enough to make it cool? Really?

We've all spent the better part of the last decade bashing Microsoft (and rightfully so), but in terms of evil intent, it's obvious who the real thugs are anymore. Microsoft is no longer the real Evil Empire, so I guess that's news...

(Posting anonymously because there are enough rabid fanbois around here anymore...)

Re:Enough of this Apple stuff already (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36055568)

Posting anonymously because your post is bullshit.

Re:Enough of this Apple stuff already (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | more than 3 years ago | (#36056002)

*Knowing full well, you're obviously an Apple hater fanboi, and feeding said troll*

The more closed, the better.

Better check your facts. Here's a site that can help.

http://opensource.apple.com/ [apple.com]

Go find any other software company that makes it this easy to find *all* their contributions to open source.

Re:Enough of this Apple stuff already (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36056476)

Yeah, Adobe does that too. And we all know what great open source citizens they are. (That's sarcastic, in case you haven't yet taken off your iBlinders and/or are still living inside the iRealityDistortionField.) Sure is great for PR, but doesn't mean a damn thing beyond that and that alone certainly doesn't mean they're doing the right thing, as the LGPL violation shows.

Also, did you LOOK at that page? Their "contributions" to open source (as you put it) are listed thusly:
* Mac OS X
* XCode
* iOS

NONE of that stuff is free as in freedom OR as in beer, so their "open source" page is 100% BS.

Re:Enough of this Apple stuff already (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36056630)

It's a good thing some company created WebKit so Apple (and a variety of others) could have their own web browsers. Who knows what else that company may have done? /sarcasm

Re:Enough of this Apple stuff already (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36056870)

Their "contributions" to open source (as you put it) are listed thusly: * Mac OS X * XCode * iOS

NONE of that stuff is free as in freedom OR as in beer, so their "open source" page is 100% BS.

Except of course, the majority of Webkit, all of Webkit2, Javacore, tons of dev tools from GCC to Ruby frameworks, a complete zeroconf reference implementation, maintaining CUPS, improvements to Apache, openSSH, bind, clamAV, MySQL, X11, etc. Yeah, those BSD licensed items they could have just taken and forked but don't are clearly not free as in beer or freedom. Why I'm sure Google pays them to use Webkit, right?

Re:Enough of this Apple stuff already (1)

e4g4 (533831) | more than 3 years ago | (#36059268)

Also, did you LOOK at that page?

Did you? Click on the links.

Re:Enough of this Apple stuff already (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36059840)

WOW! Tons of Apple-specific crap released under an Apple vanity license! PRAISE STEVE JOBS!

Re:Enough of this Apple stuff already (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | more than 3 years ago | (#36060160)

You're a fucking moron who can't even click on links.

Here's whats under the iOS 4.0 link:
JavaScriptCore-576 BSD LGPL
WebCore-737.5 BSD LGPL
cctools-782 APSL GPL
gcc-5664 GPL
gdb-1469 GPL
gnumake-126.2 GPL
keymgr-22 GPL
ld64-97.14 APSL
libiconv-26 LGPL
libstdcxx-39 GPL

Yeah, real Apple specific.

Re:Enough of this Apple stuff already (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36056004)

In terms of marketing and product design, I give them an "A-".
In terms of good citizenship in the computing community, I give Apple a "D-".

In terms of relevance I give you an "F". Got anything ON TOPIC to say, retard?

Re:Enough of this Apple stuff already (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36056530)

Uh, and calling someone a retard is on topic? You internet tough guys are a hoot.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>