Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

PlayBook Jailbreak Tool Released

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the hacksaw-is-in-the-cake dept.

Blackberry 60

Trailrunner7 notes that some dedicated hackers who've been working on jailbreaking RIM's PlayBook tablet have now "posted a detailed walkthrough of how users can accomplish the same task on their own. The technique requires the use of a custom tool, but otherwise is fairly straightforward. One of the researchers, known as Neuralic, posted the walkthrough to Pastie.org Tuesday morning. In order to begin the process, a PlayBook user need to first install the beta 2.0 version of the PlayBook software and then install the Dingleberry tool, which exploits a weakness in the PlayBook architecture which stems from the fact that the backups the device takes aren't signed."

cancel ×

60 comments

Happy Holidays from the Golden Girls! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38282526)

Thank you for being a friend
Traveled down the road and back again
Your heart is true, you're a pal and a cosmonaut.

And if you threw a party
Invited everyone you ever knew
You would see the biggest gift would be from me
And the card attached would say, thank you for being a friend.

Re:Happy Holidays from the Golden Girls! (0)

spamking (967666) | more than 2 years ago | (#38282634)

Rose, I know this is a long shot, but did you take much acid during the sixties?

Re:Happy Holidays from the Golden Girls! (0)

jeffmeden (135043) | more than 2 years ago | (#38282700)

I LOLed. The part about the cosmonaut gets me every time.

Re:Happy Holidays from the Golden Girls! (1)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 2 years ago | (#38283392)

Could we mod this +1, ...something? it's not funny, or even remotely insightful or interesting. But it's nice to see a copy/paste troll have something other than racist, sexist, homophobic or outright ridiculous flame bait.

I kind of like it.

Re:Happy Holidays from the Golden Girls! (1)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 2 years ago | (#38285344)

No!!!

Re:Happy Holidays from the Golden Girls! (1)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 2 years ago | (#38286420)

are you the same Archangel Michael from The Church of Awesome podcast?

That's great but.... (4, Interesting)

bigredradio (631970) | more than 2 years ago | (#38282532)

Hey, good job on the hack. But how many people own a PlayBook?

Re:That's great but.... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38282584)

Well, considering that there had been a $300 discount last month, there's a lot more people out there with it now than before.

Re:That's great but.... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38282862)

Counting the person who wrote dingleberry?

2.

Re:That's great but.... (3, Funny)

Kamiza Ikioi (893310) | more than 2 years ago | (#38283006)

Hey, good job on the hack. But how many people own a PlayBook?

All 5 of them are super excited!

Re:That's great but.... (1)

failedlogic (627314) | more than 2 years ago | (#38286102)

I own one! There are 4 other users?

Re:That's great but.... (1)

davester666 (731373) | more than 2 years ago | (#38288136)

No. You obviously have forgotten you bought 4 spares.

Re:That's great but.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38284098)

Hey, good job on the hack. But how many people own a PlayBook?

Well, according to most Slashdot jailbreakers/homebrewers/etc, this was clearly the one point that hundreds of millions of potential customers were waiting for. Now that jailbreaking is possible, they'll all rush out in droves to buy as many PlayBooks as they possibly can and stop those filthy locked-down Apple ne'er-do-wells once and for all! See? It makes perfect sense!

i remember the days (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38282542)

I remember the days when you'd go buy a computing device and it would just be yours, without the need to "jailbreak" it.

Guess it'll be a nice memory to tell my grandkids about someday: the time before megacorps took over our computing devices (and we all let them).

PCs still exist (4, Insightful)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#38282592)

I remember the days when you'd go buy a computing device and it would just be yours, without the need to "jailbreak" it.

PCs still exist, as do Android tablets. Locked-down computing devices likewise have existed since the Atari 7800 and NES were introduced in the mid-1980s. The more things change, the more they don't.

Re:PCs still exist (1)

Pope (17780) | more than 2 years ago | (#38283148)

The 7800 and NES were gaming consoles. WTF is a "computing device?"

Re:PCs still exist (1)

StikyPad (445176) | more than 2 years ago | (#38283252)

Ataris and NESs weren't locked down, which is largely an advent of code signing and really only became popular within the last decade or so. It was somewhat impractical to write your own software, true, but if you wrote it, the system would run it.

Atari 7800 cartridges were signed (4, Informative)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#38283362)

Ataris and NESs weren't locked down, which is largely an advent of code signing

Atari 7800 cartridges were signed.

It was somewhat impractical to write your own software, true, but if you wrote it, the system would run it.

NES and Super NES had an entirely separate bus for the CIC (checking integrated circuit) microcontrollers. This allowed a couple "lock-on" games to be published that have their own ROMs but connect the CIC bus to a passthrough cart slot to use a licensed game's key. A few other NES games had charge pumps to generate out-of-spec voltages that would stun the lock CIC in the console; the Super NES had a bit better protection circuitry to foil that. One company ended up getting slapped down in court for having defrauded the US Copyright Office to get the source code of the program that ran on the key CIC.

Re:Atari 7800 cartridges were signed (1)

StikyPad (445176) | more than 2 years ago | (#38283598)

Ok, I learned something new (or maybe relearned something, since I recall there was something about an adult game being published on the 2600 which led to the protections on the 7800). At any rate, I stand corrected. Thanks for that educational post.

Re:PCs still exist (2)

jmac_the_man (1612215) | more than 2 years ago | (#38283370)

Ataris weren't, but the NES originally were. The 10NES chip was a lockout device protected by patent and copyright.

Re:PCs still exist (1)

DarkOx (621550) | more than 2 years ago | (#38283554)

Actually the NES did have a crude DRM system, 10NES lockout, Nintendo might have invented the concept of DRM in consumer devices....

Re:PCs still exist (1)

sootman (158191) | more than 2 years ago | (#38287846)

>> I remember the days when you'd go buy a computing device and
>> it would just be yours, without the need to "jailbreak" it.

> PCs still exist, as do Android tablets.

Maybe he meant, like, earlier today. Though I don't see why remembering something from earlier in the day is worth mentioning on a public forum.

Re:i remember the days (1)

Pope (17780) | more than 2 years ago | (#38283202)

I remember the days when you'd go buy a computing device and it would just be yours, without the need to "jailbreak" it.

Guess it'll be a nice memory to tell my grandkids about someday: the time before megacorps took over our computing devices (and we all let them).

I see. And you wrote your own BASIC interpreter, machine language monitor and compiler, I/O drivers, and every application and game that you needed?

Give me a break.

Re:i remember the days (1)

DarkOx (621550) | more than 2 years ago | (#38283504)

No that his point exactly. You'd buy the machine and the manufacturer would give you a BASIC interpreter, machine language monitor and compiler, I/O drivers.

You were entirely free to develop any application you needed or source if from elsewhere, with no deliberately crafted impediments by the manufacturer. There were also no deliberate impediments to replacing the BASIC interpreter, monitor program, I/O drivers etc, but its equally unlikely they went out of their way to make easy to do so, by putting these things on writable memories or anything like that.

Still the situation was infinitely preferable to the attitude manufactures take today IMHO.

Re:i remember the days (1)

Pope (17780) | more than 2 years ago | (#38283968)

One can currently buy a computer to do all those things, and more, today. Buying a tablet assumes a trade-off in capabilities vs. a personal computer. GP is whining about an imaginary situation. I might as well complain about the lack of flying cars and rocket belts promised to my parents.

Re:i remember the days (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38284970)

> I see. And you wrote your own BASIC interpreter, machine language monitor and compiler, I/O drivers, and every application and game that you needed?

Umm... where did I say anything like that? Are you sure you replied to the right post? Your reply makes no sense in relation to anything I said.

eh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38282582)

i love how they mention some other guy but not the creator of the tool cmw.. that's kinda weak.

Dingleberry? Really? (4, Funny)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#38282594)

No wonder people are unwilling to use OSS tools when they have such horrible names.

I mean, really, when you pick a word like that [urbandictionary.com] normal people are going to stay away from it.

Seriously, that's just nasty.

Re:Dingleberry? Really? (2)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 2 years ago | (#38282684)

In terms of preferred names of tools, groups, individuals, etc. the jailbreaking scene, whatever license they happen to release their software under, really seems to resemble the warez release guys more than OSS. The latter certainly have more than their share of ill-polished nerd jokes, and generally tend not to take marketing's advice on strategic blandness very seriously; but the former intentionally seek out and adopt directly offensive, tasteless, or vaguely threatening names for things.

Re:Dingleberry? Really? (2)

hxnwix (652290) | more than 2 years ago | (#38286268)

In terms of preferred names of tools, groups, individuals, etc. the jailbreaking scene, whatever license they happen to release their software under, really seems to resemble the warez release guys more than OSS. The latter certainly have more than their share of ill-polished nerd jokes, and generally tend not to take marketing's advice on strategic blandness very seriously; but the former intentionally seek out and adopt directly offensive, tasteless, or vaguely threatening names for things.

viz. Back Orifice [wikipedia.org]

Re:Dingleberry? Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38282764)

The alternative was MuffBogie.

Re:Dingleberry? Really? (2)

Baloroth (2370816) | more than 2 years ago | (#38282792)

Well, Apple officially named their tablet device an iPad, and the oft used name for the iPod touch is the "iTouch."

And, of course, there is the everpresent Nintendo Wii. Dingleberry is hardly alone in the odd, somewhat disturbing names in the tech world.

Re:Dingleberry? Really? (1)

Apu de Beaumarchais (2023822) | more than 2 years ago | (#38283528)

iPad was a pretty lousy choice, but iTouch isn't too bad on it's own. Now if they made a version designed for children ... Although it might allow them to get greater penetration in the Catholic priest market segment.

Re:Dingleberry? Really? (1)

TripleP (525879) | more than 2 years ago | (#38284906)

Although it might allow them to get greater penetration in the Catholic priest market segment.

Typically it isn't the priest being penetrated...

Re:Dingleberry? Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38285390)

What happens if the priest goes to jail? Oh, wait...

Eh huh huh huh...it says DINGLEBERRY (1)

biscuits1978 (2499858) | more than 2 years ago | (#38282640)

I am really wondering if the developers/hacking community were chomping at the bit to find an excuse to use the term 'Dingleberry'?

Then again, they've probably used it on other occasions...

Re:Eh huh huh huh...it says DINGLEBERRY (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38282748)

What?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Mountain_Cranberry

Re:Eh huh huh huh...it says DINGLEBERRY (1)

biscuits1978 (2499858) | more than 2 years ago | (#38282972)

Try this one.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=dingleberry

But no Jailbreak for Blackberry NFC Phones (2)

ad454 (325846) | more than 2 years ago | (#38282788)

If one is unfortunately enough to get a NFC capable Blackberry phone, such as the Bold 9900, from AT&T or T-Mobile, good luck trying to get NFC to work.

Is it disabled within the Blackberry OS, based on Vendor ID, at the request of these horrible carriers, even though other carriers enable it for those exact same phones. And currently isn't any jailbreak or hack to enable it. (Older unbranding tools like MFI don't work on these newer phones.)

Actually RIM is the worst smart phone company when it comes to deliberately disabling features and functionality at the request of carriers, especially compared to Apple, Google, and Microsoft. With that type of regard for their end users, I hope they continue imploding and go bankrupt soon.

Re:But no Jailbreak for Blackberry NFC Phones (1)

monzie (729782) | more than 2 years ago | (#38283182)

BB OS 7 ( really OS 6.1 ) is a proprietary OS. Even if you jail-broke it I am not sure you could do much with it ( assuming it is technically possible to do so ) QNX is a Unix realt-time OS [wikipedia.org] and one could do potentially a lot more with a jail-broken Unix device. Let's wait for the QNX based Blackberry phones [cnet.com] ("BBX") to come out and then it could/would probably be jail-broken.

On a side-note: The current BB OS 7 based phones are good, but I would rather wait till the QNX based phones come out and then start tinkering around with them

Not Unix (1)

Kupfernigk (1190345) | more than 2 years ago | (#38283406)

According to their website, more reliable than Wikipedia, QNX is POSIX-compliant but very definitely NOT UNIX.

It is also nice, and looks like a very solid platform for BB in future - if they are allowed to have a future.

Re:Not Unix (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38283886)

You need to further your research. You are completely wrong, it is a UNIX variant.

Your mother has a penis,

Juan Epstein

Re:But no Jailbreak for Blackberry NFC Phones (3, Informative)

OlivierB (709839) | more than 2 years ago | (#38283548)

Completely agree
I have a Blackberry purchased SIM free (i..e without contract) and that I happen to use on Vodafone in the UK.
Turns out that the Podcast app's auto-download and syncing function is disabled by Vodafone!

WTF? My phone and my money; I pay for 1GB of data it should be my choice if I want to use all of that on Care Bears podcasts for all I know.

I love my BB but RIM is just bending over backwards to carrier requests. The Storm was also a half-assed attempt at a touchscreen phone from a Vodafone request as they had missed out on the iPhone (o2 was exclusive at the time).

RIM grew half a testi with the playbook's bridge function, but the operators gave them a black-eye and decided not to sell the tablet.

Rim needs to realize that customers buy phones now, no longer just corporate purchase departments.
I don't give a rat which network my phone's on, but I care about my terminal.

I am your client RIM, listen to *me*, I'm your customer, the carrier's not your customer.

Re:But no Jailbreak for Blackberry NFC Phones (1)

PsychoSlashDot (207849) | more than 2 years ago | (#38286216)

What's RIM got to do with your woes? Your carrier made a custom ROM image and loaded it on your phone. Shrug. You know... you could go ahead and load another carrier's ROM or any of a dozen hybrid custom ROMs on your phone. Either you get the functionality you're looking for or the carrier BLOCKS it.

Re:But no Jailbreak for Blackberry NFC Phones (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38283748)

So you purchased a subsidized phone, under contract from a carrier, knowing full well that you could get more/different functionality from a different product from a different carrier?

And your response is to break your agreement and steal from the carrier? (those subsidies aren't free, you know).

If you don't like the carrier, switch. If you don't like any carrier, don't use their service. Or protest. Same goes for the phones. Stealing is hardly an acceptable response. I'm really not feeling too sorry for you here.

Maybe they can sell some playbooks now... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38283308)

They should trumpet the jailbreak. It would help their sales on the playbook.

Jailbreak instruction manual (1)

reilwin (1303589) | more than 2 years ago | (#38283906)

Am I the only one who initially thought that this was an instruction manual on how to break out of jail?

"weakness in the PlayBook architecture"?! (2)

nik_qc (1202403) | more than 2 years ago | (#38284304)

???? I do not get it. I understand that bashing RIM is "a la mode" these days, but I think it is an overkill. Any device can be hacked when it is locally accessible. Any. There is no architecture that can withstand an attack if it can be performed while having physical access to the system. It is just a question of time and tools. And for many consumer devices it is just not practical - not too many people are interested in jailbreaking Panasonic microwaves.

The quality of the architecture is determined how hard is to break into someone's device while having some kind of remote access to it - user-driven or from the network.

Re:"weakness in the PlayBook architecture"?! (1)

Reasonable Facsimile (2478544) | more than 2 years ago | (#38284688)

???? I do not get it. I understand that bashing RIM is "a la mode" these days, but I think it is an overkill. Any device can be hacked when it is locally accessible. Any. There is no architecture that can withstand an attack if it can be performed while having physical access to the system. It is just a question of time and tools. And for many consumer devices it is just not practical - not too many people are interested in jailbreaking Panasonic microwaves.

The quality of the architecture is determined how hard is to break into someone's device while having some kind of remote access to it - user-driven or from the network.

Regarding jailbreaking microwaves, I'm sure there's someone out there that wants to pwn a Stouffer's frozen dinner with their 1337 skillz.

Re:"weakness in the PlayBook architecture"?! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38285844)

???? I do not get it. I understand that bashing RIM is "a la mode" these days, but I think it is an overkill. Any device can be hacked when it is locally accessible. Any. There is no architecture that can withstand an attack if it can be performed while having physical access to the system.

This isn't really true. Ever jailbreak I've investigated has been the result of a flaw or the security model or a bug in some trusted component. It's entirely possible to build a rock-solid system that takes insane levels to jailbreak it. The cost-benifit ratio works out such that it's never done for consumer level equipment, but there are absolutely bits of technology out there where all hacking it would result in is a pile of useless silicon.

Re:"weakness in the PlayBook architecture"?! (1)

narcc (412956) | more than 2 years ago | (#38286752)

Ever jailbreak I've investigated has been the result of a flaw or the security model or a bug in some trusted component.

The "flaw" has already been patched in the latest OTA update.

Still not a jailbreak. (2)

Linegod (9952) | more than 2 years ago | (#38285718)

It is a privilege escalation to a 'root' user, which in this context is equivalent to an 'admin' user.

In short, using an insecure backup/restore process, it changes the ability for root to login via ssh. No bootloader access, no 'jailbreak'. From there, all you get is what you could have done by developing an app.

As you could always load an app directly onto your Playbook, this is not all that impressive.

I have come to expect it from Crackberry, but though /. would have a critical eye.

And it allows you to do..what? (1)

Billlagr (931034) | more than 2 years ago | (#38287150)

Not a troll, I genuinely want to know what benefit it is. You can already load any software, there aren't custom distros of the OS to load, you aren't tied to an 'App Store', so how useful is this really? I also notice that it requires a beta of the OS, so how long-lived will this 'jailbreak' be? Is it something RIM can fix before releasing 2.0 to the general public?

Re:And it allows you to do..what? (1)

narcc (412956) | more than 2 years ago | (#38288012)

so how long-lived will this 'jailbreak' be?

It's already been patched.

Re:And it allows you to do..what? (1)

rikkards (98006) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289542)

Don't know if it's patched but I tried it last night and it looks to be a conflict between DingleBerry and the Blackberry Desktop Manager. When one accesses the playbook the other can't see it. You also need to install the 2.0Beta before doing anything. Actually I look of it better than the production one.

Re:And it allows you to do..what? (1)

rikkards (98006) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289550)

How do you load software without using the App Store? I didn't know you could do that.

Already fixed (1)

SynthaxError (1417629) | more than 2 years ago | (#38289854)

It seems it didn't take long for RIM to take action: http://goodereader.com/blog/tablet-slates/rim-plugs-dingleberry-hole/ [goodereader.com]

"RIM ensured DingleBerry did not get the chance to make merry for too long. For no sooner had the DingleBerry app come into existence, RIM is back to seize the initiative with a fix that effectively plugs the hole that the DingleBerry developers had exploited to sneak past the PlayBook defenses. So those who had sought to gain root access to their PlayBook tablets, well RIM ensured they had less than a day to be adventurous with their devices.

The new RIM update should be available to all PlayBook owners within the next few days and being all of 5 MB, shouldn’t take more than a few minutes to install."

Re:Already fixed (1)

rikkards (98006) | more than 2 years ago | (#38290986)

Except that patch is for v1. You need to be running v2 to be able to use Dingleberry. Chances are there is a corresponding patch for 2 as well.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...