Gizmodo 
Enter your username and password.
Tip your editors:
tips@gizmodo.com
Editorial Director:
Brian Lam | Email | Twitter
Editor:
Jason Chen
Email | AIM | Twitter
Features Editor:
Wilson Rothman
Email | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
Email | AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan
Email | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci
Email | Twitter
Sean Fallon
Email | Twitter
Jack Loftus
Email | Twitter
John Herrman
Email | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Email
Chris Mascari
Email
Danny Allen
Email | Twitter
Rosa Golijan
Email | Twitter
Chris Jacob
Email
Columnist:
Brendan I. Koerner
Interns:
Don Nguyen
Email
Kyle VanHemert
Email
Comment Intern:
Nick Ellenoff | Email
Comment Account Questions:
Comments@gizmodo.com
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
08/17/09
Steve Jobs could become hitler and they would still bow down to him and do as he says. very pathetic
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
It would also bring back deleted messages as new, messages I deleted a few days ago.
08/17/09
John Herrman, from this day forth, you shall be known as Chicken Little.
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
08/17/09
@Kaiser-Machead: and how about fashion disasters?
08/17/09
08/17/09
07/24/09
As any IT guy can tell you, blackberries get hacked all the time. They are no more secure than a iPhone.
If you were a responsible well informed tech reporter, your story would have included facts, such as two recent hacker symposiums where they held contests for who could hack various smartphone platforms the fastest. All the major platforms were hacked successfully, and the blackberry fell BEFORE the iPhone did... by a considerable margin too.
It's fine to report the story that the iPhone is vulnerable, but don't mislead readers by making it sound like other platforms are more secure. That's a flat out lie. And if you believe it, you are either mis-informed or a lazy journalist.
07/24/09
You’re not comparing apples to apples. This is only about the encryption.
07/25/09
07/26/09
07/26/09
07/24/09
Please, no comma between Incredibly and Dangerously...
07/24/09
* Does the sentence make sense if the adjectives are written in reverse order?
* Does the sentence make sense if the adjectives are written with and between them?
07/24/09
07/24/09
07/24/09
07/24/09
07/23/09
That's like saying "if you have access to someone's PC, you can hack in and get all their files." No DUH! Everything is hackable w/ physical access and time. That's why the whole point of SECURITY is to put walls up and make it harder to access the target (doors, fences, dogs, walls) and reduce the amount of time that the object is not observed (cameras, motion sensors, patrol guards).
This is like the story of that guy who was hacking the Mac every day for 30 days. A good portion of his hacks were him logging in as root and installing vulnerabilities.
Call me when he can do this remotely.
07/24/09
07/23/09
Someone steals your iPhone there is a 110% chance who ever took it just wanna make a quick buck, No one gives a sh*t what's in it. All you need is a passcode on it, nothing more, that way who ever buys your phone just wipes it out to remove code.
07/23/09
07/23/09
- how robust does Apple claim their security to be?
- are there as many people trying to actively hack the Blackberry?
One of the commenters on the Wired page makes a valid point: if you can gain physical control of the computer/device, you can also gain access to the data on that device. This is true for most things and unless the data is store remotely any amount of security will not prevent an expert taking what they want.
I am not trying to defend Apple, what I am trying to do is to put things to perspective, rather than just having a knee jerk reaction.
07/23/09
07/23/09
From the Wired article "Apple claims that hundreds of thousands of iPhones are being used by corporations and government agencies."
So it's reasonable to expect robust security if you're boasting about government agencies as your customers.
Then again, like you mention, if you lose the physical control of your device, you're expected to lose its data too.
07/23/09
07/24/09
2. A lot of people are trying to hack BB. The difference is they aren't doing it as an academic exercise, they're doing it as part of corporate espionage and being paid handsomely for it. They tend to keep their mouths shut about their findings.
As for gaining physical access, a good encryption system makes it prohibitively time consuming to break into. Can it be broken, of course, but it might take a couple days, couple weeks, couple months... by the time someone could actually get in, the device should have wiped itself. Encryption doesn't have to keep the hackers out forever, just long enough for the "self destruct sequence" to initiate
07/23/09
Even though I don't email my dealers on my iPhone, and I do that on my computer, this still makes me nervous.
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/24/09
07/24/09
"Now, to argue that the majority of iphone users are business men and women would be a completely invalid argument."
Question: Where did I argue that the majority of iPhone users are business men? I'd really like to know that, since I'm not even a 'business' man myself. It seems your entire assertion is based on this (quoted) premise, so I won't even address the rest of it (which, IMO, doesn't even need to be addressed as I agree with it) until you substantiate that statement.
07/24/09
07/25/09
07/25/09
Sure they would like to offer things that the blackberry offers, but there is just no way apple wants the iphone to be a blackberry. They are entirely different devices. I think what you are trying to say is they would like to try to convince blackberry customers to come their way, which is true and is also why they are offering "blackberry-like" features, but the iphone is not a strictly business phone and it never will be.