Difference between revisions of "Talk:Main Page"

From The iPhone Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Hardware section names: new section)
(Eliminating the firmware key links on the device lists)
 
(329 intermediate revisions by 43 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
  +
{{Talk Archive}}
== Apple TV ==
 
We could add the Apple TV to the hardware section on the main page as we have other pages for it in the wiki as well --[[User:M2m|M2m]] 07:42, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 
   
== firmware keys ==
+
== Baseband Chip Page Titles ==
  +
For the baseband chip page titles, I think we should stick with the model number despite the marketing name. Pages:
We need a "standard" for firmware key posting so that we can stay organized. Who likes this method?
 
  +
* [[S-Gold 2|PMB8876]] marketed "S-Gold 2"
* [[Kirkwood 7A341 (iPhone 3G)]]
 
  +
* [[X-Gold 608|PMB8878]] marketed "X-Gold 608"
* [[Kirkwood 7A341 (iPod touch 2G)]]
 
  +
* [[XMM 6180]] marketed "X-Gold 618"
{{unsigned|ChronicDev|02:28, June 18, 2009}}
 
  +
* [[MDM6600]] (unknown marketing name)
-----
 
  +
* [[MDM6610]] (unknown marketing name)
  +
* [[MDM9x00]] (unknown marketing name)
  +
--[[User:5urd|5urd]] 21:35, 8 May 2012 (MDT)
  +
:I'm leaning more towards the marketing names, since I think people are more familiar with them and they've been in use for a long time. We've always referred to the iPhone 2G's baseband as the "S-Gold 2" and the iPhone 3G/3GS's baseband as the "X-Gold 608." (By the way, it sounds like Qualcomm "markets" their chips by model number. [http://www.qualcomm.com/media/releases/2011/02/14/qualcomm-announces-commercial-availability-gobi3000-modules]) --[[User:Dialexio|<span style="color:#C20; font-weight:normal;">Dialexio</span>]] 00:11, 9 May 2012 (MDT)
  +
:I created most of these newer pages and always used the model number (without space). So I agree with that in general. Changing old ones is a totally different story though, where we need more consent. I would be for it (and create a redirect on the marketing names). --[[User:Http|http]] 01:52, 9 May 2012 (MDT)
   
  +
== Baseband downgrade possibility: Attempt for 04.11.08/04.12.01 to 04.10.01 ==
Love it. -drg
 
  +
'''0x1''' There is no downgrade possibility; according to the most basis of fact in how baseband works as explained by dear MuscleNerd and there is signature checks as well as bootloader's chain of trust that I'm not going to repeat them again, but for this topic I start from iTunes error 1,-1,11
  +
  +
'''0x2''' iTunes error 1,-1,11 :
  +
We will get this error whenever we want to do something with BB which is not allowed by apple. you can read about these error in detail from here[http://theiphonewiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=ITunes_Errors].
  +
Going deeper, this error raise by baseband's bootloader whenever you attempt to downgrade BB (in this case), this happens inside the NOR so this is why we can not exploit it easily from the outside.
  +
Another reason for this error (and in here the most important one that I wanted to discuss) is that apple no longer signing that firmware.
   
  +
'''0x3''' The situation that there is no BB installed on iPhone! :
anything is better then what we got now --[[User:Posixninja|posixninja]] 05:16, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 
  +
I could restore my iPhone4 in the case of there will be no BB at all. I called it reset my BB. There will be no Wifi, no BT.
  +
At the first time (a few months since I've started to work on) I thought it is dead (as apple confirmed this also). But I could restore it only to stock firmware with the latest one.
  +
So for who stays in 04.11.08 it may lead to do upgrade to 04.12.01 permanently with the latest iOS, now is 5.1.1 and before for me was 5.0.1, so be sure what you are doing and then go to reset the BB.
  +
So back to the game, if there was no BB then there is no bootloeader inside the NOR to stuck BB update process but I do not know that in this case what happened to "sectable" also known as "locktable" which is the master accountable to unlock the carrier, any way I think so only firmware signature checking by apple will be remain in "restore verify process" by iTunes. because as mentioned earlier, "currentBB"(BB to be updated) is allowed to be update by "comingBB" (BB to be updating to) only if :
  +
1. "currentBB" < "comingBB" (= are you the most recent/lastest BB?)
  +
2. "comingBB" is now signing by apple (=if so, does apple sign you? Are you eligible?)
  +
Huum... What happens if "currentBB"="null/zero/no matter"? Could we eliminate option (1) from the security check above in this case? So what next?
   
  +
'''0x4''' Track back to the issue lead us inside the bbfw file (ICE3_04.11.08_BOOT_02.13.Release) which contains four .fls files inside, and the most important one is psi_flash.fls who is in charge of security checks before handover the routines to stack.fls which is responsible for updating the baseband. This file does like NOR bootloader but fortunately it's outside the device so it is accessible but not such easy format to be understand by programmers. They are raw ROM based images for XMM6180 chip, ARM based and programmed in Thread-X, but the compiler is unknown; I will write about some disassembly notes using ida pro 6.1; by the way I leave my iPhone with no BB trying to find out and break the trust chains in the above files in order to bypass the bootloader security checks which may let us to downgrade to 04.10.01 which is currently unlocked by Gevey.
Nice job with the reorganization --[[User:Geohot|geohot]]
 
  +
Keep in mind that if this solution works..., it will need the SHSH for downgrading the iOS firmware to do reset the BB.
  +
I heard that iPhoneDevTeam are going to release the new version of Redsn0w which there will be no need to restore by iTunes but I do not know if the baseband approaches supposed to be addressed or it will work like iFaith that is basically bypass (preserve) BB, any way if I found this article useful I will note about disassembly and possibility approach as well as BB reset to share with any followers.
  +
'''--[[User:Kambiz|Kambiz]] 07:49, 13 May 2012 (MDT)K.N'''
   
  +
== Bluetooth Chip on [[iPhone 5]] ==
I know this thread is old, but I like the template on [[Apex 8A400 (iPod touch 3G)]] frankly because I helped to make it, and it links to all parts of the FW so people know what the **** a kernelcache or VFDecrypt is. :P --drake
 
  +
Is there any confirmation of the Bluetooth chip used in the iPhone 5? If there is, can we edit this page and add it? --[[User:5urd|5urd]] 10:04, 8 October 2012 (MDT)
  +
:Chipworks [http://www.chipworks.com/blog/recentteardowns/2012/10/02/apple-iphone-5-the-rf/ analyzed the iPhone 5's Murata Wi-Fi module] and determined it uses the [[BCM4334]]. I'll add it to the Main Page now. --[[User:Dialexio|<span style="color:#C20; font-weight:normal;">Dialexio</span>]] 20:35, 8 October 2012 (MDT)
   
  +
== Adding vulnerability to main page ==
== Should [[User:iH8sn0w|iH8sn0w]] be listed as a hacker? ==
 
  +
The page [[CVE-2013-0964]] is currently orphaned. I think it would fit under the "Vulnerabilities and Exploits" subheading. Can someone with adequate permission make the change? [[User:0x56|0x56]] ([[User talk:0x56|talk]]) 03:52, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
  +
:Added. --[[User:Http|http]] ([[User talk:Http|talk]]) 00:53, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
   
  +
==Update for new devices==
Stop the edit war, and debate the question here. Otherwise I'll protect the main page. --[[User:Dialexio|<span style="color:#C20; font-weight:normal;">Dialexio</span>]] 06:05, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 
  +
Somebody should update the main page (table) for the 5s and 5c --[[User:Phyrrus9|Phyrrus9]] ([[User talk:Phyrrus9|talk]]) 21:14, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
  +
:No need. It says "iPhone 4S and newer". --[[User:IAdam1n|iAdam1n]] ([[User talk:IAdam1n|talk]]) 22:01, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
   
  +
==Permission==
I think he should because when we are waiting for a jailbreak, he comes out with sn0wbreeze for us to have a jailbreak until there is a full ready to go jailbreak. Just because he creates a GUI for xpwn doesn't mean he shouldn't not be considered a hacker. So stop your whining and you try to make something like that =/. Also by him creating sn0wbreeze, it gives developers time to update their apps for the newest firmware {{unsigned|Anonymous|23:44, September 24, 2010 (UTC)}}
 
  +
Permission to add pangu8? Or should we wait until a Cydia version comes out? --[[User:Awesomebing1|Awesomebing1]] ([[User talk:Awesomebing1|talk]]) 15:52, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
 
  +
:It has already been added and is fine IMO. I would state that it's SSH only though. --[[User:IAdam1n|iAdam1n]] ([[User talk:IAdam1n|talk]]) 16:22, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
I think he should. He uses IDA right? He makes patches? Found the blacksn0w baseband crash - hacker IMHO -- [[User:Windows Helpdesk|blackthund3r]]
 
  +
  +
== All of the Watch product images? ==
  +
  +
So I was looking for Apple product images and found this interesting [https://www.apple.com/shop/sitemaps/sitemap-buy-images.xml document] that has links to all of the (current) product images. Since the Apple Watch has so many models, editions, colors, etc., would it be worthwhile to upload all the images listed from the document? So far I've found [http://store.storeimages.cdn-apple.com/4711/as-images.apple.com/is/image/AppleInc/aos/published/images/w/42/w42ss/sbbk/w42ss-sbbk-detail this one]. (Apple Watch 42mm, Stainless Steel buckle) --[[User:Citrusui|Citrusui]] ([[User talk:Citrusui|talk]]) 18:01, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
  +
  +
:It's not a great idea to upload images from Apple's website in general, since they're copyrighted by Apple, unless you can make a decent argument that using a copyrighted image in a particular article is [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use#Fair_use_under_United_States_law is fair use]. [[User:Britta|Britta]] ([[User talk:Britta|talk]]) 09:01, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
  +
  +
== Removal of Apple TV 3G from "Latest Firmware" Section? ==
  +
  +
Apparently, the Apple TV 3G has not received any updates from Apple for a long time and looks like it will not get any in the future. So, should we remove it from the "Latest Firmware" section on the Main Page? Any other thoughts? --[[User:Tp1194045441|Tp1194045441]] ([[User talk:Tp1194045441|talk]]) 03:51, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
  +
:It's still been sold so it should stay as it's still "active" for this reason. --[[User:IAdam1n|iAdam1n]] ([[User talk:IAdam1n|talk]]) 22:34, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
  +
  +
== Cleanup ==
  +
  +
This page has a lot of links... It almost looks intimidating. That's not exactly an impression you want to leave on a first-time visitor. I'd like to clean it up, but I'm not entirely sure on what to cut out. I currently have everything in "Hardware" underneath the basebands in mind, and some of the definitions (be honest, how popular of a topic do you think iBEC is?). Any thoughts on what can or should not be cut? --[[User:Dialexio|Dialexio]] ([[User talk:Dialexio|talk]]) 21:09, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
  +
:I think we should remove links to pages that have not been created yet. We can always add them back if/when made. --[[User:IAdam1n|iAdam1n]] ([[User talk:IAdam1n|talk]]) 22:33, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
  +
  +
== KPP ==
  +
  +
Is there a reason why a KPP page has not been created? It would be useful to many...
  +
--[[User:Detiac|Detiac]] 15:19, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
  +
:It would certainly be useful and something that should be on the wiki, but I don't think any active users are knowledgeable enough on the topic to provide a writeup. --[[User:Dialexio|Dialexio]] ([[User talk:Dialexio|talk]]) 02:23, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
  +
  +
== Rename Bad Stuff section ==
  +
  +
I don't know what we could rename it to, but it doesn't come off very well --[[User:Nullpixel|Nullpixel]] ([[User talk:Nullpixel|talk]]) 17:26, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
  +
:Although the name is accurate, "Bad Stuff" does sound a little... off-kilter. Maybe something like "Malicious/Cautionary Topics?" --[[User:Dialexio|Dialexio]] ([[User talk:Dialexio|talk]]) 02:23, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
  +
::Sorry for the late response. I agree, this is a better name. --[[User:Nullpixel|Nullpixel]] ([[User talk:Nullpixel|talk]]) 16:10, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
  +
  +
== Various Software ==
  +
  +
I feel like the Various Software section should either be segmented into smaller sections (Downgrading Utilities, Package Managers, etc.) or not exist at all -- and in the former case, would most likely not be under the section Various Software. Any thoughts? --[[User:Wxblank|wxblank]] ([[User talk:Wxblank|talk]]) 16:02, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
  +
  +
== Firmware Status style. ==
  +
  +
I am proposing a change to the firmware status table, to pack-in more info into a smaller space while also being more future-proof.
  +
  +
i believe having the table in this style will improve not only the aesthetic of the table, but also be able to handle more devices in the future.
  +
  +
===Exhibit A===
  +
'''This is what we have now:'''
  +
  +
{| class="wikitable" style="font-size:.95em; width:100%;"
  +
|-
  +
! style="height:3em;" | [[Models|Device]]
  +
! [[List of Apple TVs|Apple TV (4th generation)]] and newer
  +
! [[List of Apple Watches|Apple Watch Series 1]] and newer
  +
! [[HomePod]]
  +
! [[iPad (5th generation)]] and newer<br />[[iPad Air 2]]<br />[[iPad mini 4]]<br />[[List of iPad Pros|iPad Pro]] (12.9-inch, 9.7-inch, 12.9-inch 2nd generation, 10.5-inch)<br />[[iPhone 6s]] through [[iPhone X]]<br />[[iPod touch (7th generation)]]
  +
! [[iPad Air (3rd generation)]]<br />[[iPad mini (5th generation)]]<br />[[List of iPad Pros|iPad Pro (11-inch, 12.9-inch 3rd generation)]]<br />[[N841AP|iPhone XR]] and newer
  +
|-
  +
! style="height:3em;" | Latest<br />[[Firmware|Public Firmware]]
  +
| 13.4.6 <small>(17L570)</small>
  +
| 6.2.6 <small>(17T620)</small>
  +
| 13.4.6 <small>(17L570)</small>
  +
| colspan="2" | 13.5.1 <small>(17F80)</small>
  +
|-
  +
! Jailbreak available?
  +
| {{yes|Yes <br/><small>([[checkra1n]])<ref name="HD-only"></ref><ref name="untestedOS"></ref></small>}}
  +
| colspan="2" {{no}}
  +
| {{yes|Yes <br/><small>([[checkra1n]])</small>}}
  +
| {{No|No <br/><small>(N/A)</small>}}
  +
|-
  +
! style="height:3em;" | Latest<br />[[Beta Firmware|Beta Firmwares]]
  +
| 13.4.8 beta 3 <small>(17M5558b)</small><br/>14.0 beta <small>(18J5313t)</small>
  +
| 6.2.8 beta 3 <small>(17U5559d)</small><br/>7.0 beta (Series 3+) <small>(18R5310a)</small>
  +
| {{n/a}}
  +
| colspan="6" | 13.6 beta 3 <small>(17G5059c)</small><br/>14.0 beta <small>(18A5301v)</small>
  +
|}
  +
<references>
  +
<ref name="HD-only">Apple TV HD only but supports Apple TV 4K with hardware modfications</ref>
  +
<ref name="untestedOS">Check the "Allow untested iOS/iPadOS/tvOS versions" checkbox in the options view to bypass the version check.</ref>
  +
</references>
  +
  +
===Exhibit B===
  +
'''This is the style i propose we replace Exhibit A with:'''
  +
  +
{| class="wikitable" style="font-size:.95em; width:100%;"
  +
|-
  +
! style="height:3em;" | [[Models|Product Linup]]
  +
! [[List of Apple TVs|Apple TV]]
  +
! rowspan="2" | [[HomePod]]
  +
! [[List of Apple Watches|Apple Watch]]
  +
! [[List of iPhones|iPhone]]
  +
! [[List of iPads|iPad]]
  +
! [[List of iPad Airs|iPad Air]]
  +
! [[List of iPad Pros|iPad Pro]]
  +
! [[List of iPad minis|iPad mini]]
  +
! [[List of iPod touches|iPod touch]]
  +
|-
  +
! Supported
  +
! [[Apple TV (4th generation)|Apple TV HD]]<br>and newer
  +
! [[Apple Watch Series 1|Series 1]]<br>and newer
  +
! [[iPhone 6s]]<br>and newer
  +
! [[iPad (5th generation)|5th Generation]]<br>and newer
  +
! [[iPad Air 2]]<br>and newer
  +
! [[iPad Pro (12.9-inch)|12.9-inch (2016)]]<br>and newer
  +
! [[iPad mini 4]]<br>and newer
  +
! [[iPod touch (7th generation)|7th Generation]]
  +
|-
  +
! style="height:3em;" | Latest<br />[[Firmware|Public Firmwares]]
  +
| colspan="2" | 13.4.6 <small>(17L570)</small>
  +
| 6.2.6 <small>(17T620)</small>
  +
| colspan="6" | 13.5.1 <small>(17F80)</small>
  +
|-
  +
! Jailbreak availability
  +
| {{yes|Yes<br/><small>([[checkra1n]])<ref name="untestedOS"></ref><ref name="HD-only"></ref></small>}}
  +
| colspan="2" {{no}}
  +
| colspan="6" {{partial|Yes* <small>([[checkra1n]])<ref name="untestedOS"></ref></small><br><small>*except for devices with the [[T8020|A12]] or newer SoC's.}}
  +
|-
  +
! rowspan="2" style="height:3em;" | Latest<br />[[Beta Firmware|Beta Firmwares]]
  +
| 13.4.8 beta 3 <small>(17M5558b)</small>
  +
| {{n/a}}
  +
| 6.2.8 beta 3 <small>(17U5559d)</small>
  +
| colspan="6" | 13.6 beta 3 <small>(17G5059c)</small>
  +
|-
  +
| 14.0 beta <small>(18J5313t)</small>
  +
| {{n/a}}
  +
| 7.0 beta <small>(18R5310a)</small>*<br>*<small>[[Apple Watch Series 3|Series 3]] and newer only.</small>
  +
| colspan="6" | 14.0 beta <small>(18A5301v)</small>
  +
|}
  +
  +
<references>
  +
<ref name="HD-only">[[Apple TV (4th generation)|Apple TV HD]] only, but can support the [[Apple TV 4K]] with some hardware modifications.</ref>
  +
<ref name="untestedOS">Check the "Allow untested iOS/iPadOS/tvOS versions" checkbox in the options view to bypass the version check.</ref>
  +
</references>
  +
  +
I am open to comments or suggestions - [[User:DanTheMann15|DanTheMann15]] ([[User talk:DanTheMann15|talk]]) 23:11, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
  +
:I agree and prefer the new style. It sucks having devices listed twice but that would change once watchOS 7 is out of beta. Maybe though we could just add a note under the table that watchOS 7 beta’s require series 3 or newer and not have the second list. IMO that’d be better. —[[User:IAdam1n|iAdam1n]] ([[User talk:IAdam1n|talk]]) 00:16, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
  +
  +
That sounds like a good idea, and the note actually fits inside the table! i've changed Exhibit B to reflect this. - [[User:DanTheMann15|DanTheMann15]] ([[User talk:DanTheMann15|talk]]) 01:13, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
  +
  +
:I made the edit before seeing the talk page, oops. I'll leave it like that for now. [[User:Admanny|Admanny]] ([[User talk:Admanny|talk]]) 06:09, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
  +
  +
I like the "Jailbreak availability" text, but on the other hand though many people ask that question: is a "Jailbreak available?", i edited Exhibit B so everyone can see how it looks, get other opinions on it, but overall im down with either way. - [[User:DanTheMann15|DanTheMann15]] ([[User talk:DanTheMann15|talk]]) 08:00, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
  +
:I think "available?" makes more sense to be honest with the yes and no answers. --[[User:IAdam1n|iAdam1n]] ([[User talk:IAdam1n|talk]]) 13:10, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
  +
::I changed it because it's unconventional for labels in a chart to be written in the form of a question. But, this is a small wiki anyway, so if the consensus sways towards keeping the question, that's fine. I'm still with keeping it as "availability". [[User:Admanny|Admanny]] ([[User talk:Admanny|talk]]) 19:55, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
  +
  +
== Mac in the jailbreak table ==
  +
  +
Why is this in the table? Macs aren't exactly locked up in a BSD jail like iOS devices; they have security to prevent modifying system files by default, but Macs are a more open platform and SIP can be disabled to edit said files. You don't need to run some jailbreaking utility to e.g. change around some system icons in macOS. I presume the intent was to say bridgeOS on Macs with the T2 are susceptible to jailbreaking per the footnote, but the "Supported" row points to "All Macs with the M1". None of the M1 Macs have a T2 chip. The information provided is also for macOS, not bridgeOS. --[[User:Dialexio|Dialexio]] ([[User talk:Dialexio|talk]]) 08:24, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
  +
:That can be fixed but it was added as it's "firmware status" not just "jailbreak status" as should be there. --[[User:IAdam1n|iAdam1n]] ([[User talk:IAdam1n|talk]]) 11:40, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
   
  +
== HTTPS links on firmwares and OTA's that are hosted on "updates.cdn-apple.com" ==
Disagree. There are lots of other ppl @ the same level as sn0w that aren't listed there. Compared to MN, Geo and planet, he's nowhere near their level. Are we going to list sherif for finding the latest unlock exploit? It's not even up for debate, he doesn't belong there. --[[user:tsuehpsyde|tsuehpsyde]]
 
   
  +
I'm writing this topic because [[User:Dialexio|Dialexio]] hasn't been using https. https has been used here on the wiki regularly since 2019 when adding new firmware links that are hosted on Apple's CDN, which host's all of Apple's firmwares released since April 2018, such as iOS 11.3.1 and newer.
wrong snowbreze is a graphical user interface of xpwn he just got the keys ( another tool that is not his ) and told xpwn to decrypt the .ipsw any one can do that and if ih8sn0w is classed as a hacker then blackthund3r should be as well --[[User:Liamchat|liamchat]] 16:01, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 
   
  +
back when apple was still using appldnld.apple.com, adding https (https://secure-appldnld.apple.com) would make the links unreliable or not work at all.
I don't think he should be listed, he hasn't contributed anything really except for adding a GUI around xpwn or developing a tool that has already been released by someone else. He doesn't actually create anything on his own and if anyone can remember from before he failed to credit the correct people that created xpwn and claimed that since they weren't around anymore he didn't have too but eventually gave in after Geohot and MuscleNerd plus others got on him saying it wasn't really his work. --[[user:alpineflip|alpineflip]]
 
   
  +
but now with http://updates-http.cdn-apple.com, it works just fine to switch to (https://updates.cdn-apple.com).
You all made good points and I can't not agree really :D Perhaps we need a developers page then? People like [[User:iH8sn0w|iH8sn0w]] (and possibly myself coming to [[User:liamchat|Liamchat]]'s point) that develop stuff for the iPhone Pwning community but can't be classified as 'hackers' as such but still need recognition. iH8sn0w has worked hard for the community... -- [[User:Windows Helpdesk|blackthund3r]]
 
   
  +
it is easy as pie to switch the links to use https by using a good text-editing program that has a "find and replace" function. like [https://notepad-plus-plus.org Notepad++] or [https://wiki.gnome.org/Apps/Gedit Gedit].
ok so we need a page to document all app's developed to help those who have just joined iphone community start to learn how jailbreaks actually work and we should have a section documenting all baseband crash developers --[[User:Liamchat|liamchat]] 18:11, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 
   
Agreed, agreed and agreed... That means that /anyone/ can create something for the [[iPhone]] / [[iPod touch]] and receive credit/attribution and a way of making it available to everyone. It should literally list everyone and what they have contributed - including hackers/real JB devs. Also a page explaining the internals of a jailbreak would be advantageous (and I removed below section as it's being covered here) -- [[User:Windows Helpdesk|blackthund3r]]
 
   
  +
is there any good reason we shouldn't be using https on the newer firmwares hosted on Apple's CDN?
FWIW, this section was recently added. [http://theiphonewiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page&diff=7677&oldid=7661 Here] is where it came into play. I think this is a good section to have on the Main page, but really it should be reserved for notable hackers in the iPhone community. geohot and MuscleNerd both write/work on jailbreaks and unlocks (their own, from scratch), even swapping work on ultrasn0w after geohot opened his source. PlanetBeing has also worked on unlocks (most recently the latest ultrasn0w revision), not to mention his work on Linux for iPhone to get that working. Someone noted earlier in a rev note that geohot isn't on the scene anymore. This is irrelevant, as this is still his Wiki (unless ownership changed?) and he's still hacking on the iPhone. Just because he's not giving you free stuff anymore doesn't mean he isn't involved. He just got tired of people bothering him. Regardless, ih8sn0w is not on the same level as these guys. At all. --[[user:tsuehpsyde|tsuehpsyde]]
 
   
  +
- [[User:DanTheMann15|DanTheMann15]] ([[User talk:DanTheMann15|talk]]) 22:32, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
So if the homepage is only for notable hackers where do we put everything / everyone else? We need a categorised page that has sorted developers and what they made. Then anyone can write a program and distribute via the iPhone Wiki. Then everyone gets a mention and anyone can show their tools off without being overshadowed by 'the big boys' -- [[User:Windows Helpdesk|blackthund3r]]
 
  +
:(This should probably be on [[The iPhone Wiki:Community portal]] instead, but oh well.) It kinda boils down to personal preference; to my understanding, there was never any sort of formal agreement on this. A user simply started converting some links to HTTPS, and I just let them do their thing since I do see benefits of using HTTPS. (At the end of the day though, you're still going to get the same file, especially if you verify its hash.) But personally, I'd rather keep the links the same way Apple provided them— if they gave us an HTTP link, that's what I'll add, and if they gave an HTTPS link, that's what I'll add. I'm not opposed to others changing the links I post to HTTPS as it's still Apple hosting and providing the download links, but I don't feel we should have to go out of our way to add one more step to an already tedious task. You can make an argument that it's for consistency, but that logic can also be used towards converting HTTPS links back to HTTP, and we would also trim the URLs for the older IPSWs so those look more consistent with newer, pre cdn-apple.com releases. --[[User:Dialexio|Dialexio]] ([[User talk:Dialexio|talk]]) 00:21, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
   
  +
i understand where you are coming from, but i will continue to use https on the firmware links i post, since there are more advantages than the other way around, albeit the possible reason why apple gives us http links is likely because https requires valid certificates, which for some reason not everybody has. also it's important to note about HTTPS-Only on some major browsers so http links will not work for those who have that setting enabled. and like i said above, it takes me a fraction of a second to convert the links to https, thanks to Notepad++. perhaps you could add a setting that you can enable in the OTA Catalog Parser that would automatically convert links to https when parsing the links to save time. - [[User:DanTheMann15|DanTheMann15]] ([[User talk:DanTheMann15|talk]]) 18:47, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
a lot of people who make jailbreak's are not mentioned [[User:Zibri]] ( was the first to use the [[AES Keys]] ) and [[User:ChronicDev]] both made a jailbreak and descoverd an exploit --[[User:Liamchat|liamchat]] 18:48, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 
   
  +
well i'll be darned, apple started providing https links for OTA downloads through pallas now! that'll save time on links going forward, i wonder if they'll do the same on IPSW's, only time will tell. - [[User:DanTheMann15|DanTheMann15]] ([[User talk:DanTheMann15|talk]]) 21:27, 17 Jul 2021 (UTC)
His tools are mentioned which people can find easily on the main page so they will know who he is but to list him under a category with people like MN, PB, comex, pod2g etc he doesn't even fall close to. Just because you developed an app doesn't mean you are considered a hacker especially if it's not even your work originally! As for the patches in his new version of sn0wbreeze I'm pretty sure msft_guy (not affiliated with any dev teams) released his bundles and by coincidence sn0wbreeze supports the new FW shortly after --[[user:alpineflip|alpineflip]]
 
   
  +
== Cleanup ==
I dont believe iH8sn0w should be considered a hacker. All he does is repackage xpwn into a user-friendly GUI for Windows users and thats it. It's also funny how many naive people see him as being a hacker and they just have complete trust that he'll jailbreak the latest OS. He only recycles current known information. I bet if the dev team found a way to hide their bundles for when the iPhone 4 might be pwnagetool compatible, iH8sn0w will not be able to make sn0wbreeze support it. It's also ridiculous how he just puts up both, donation links and a chipin link for funding for new devices. I believe that that is just being plain abusive. People need to open their eyes and see that iH8sn0w is nothing special. --[[user:gamer765|gamer765]]
 
   
  +
Can we clean up the front page? It feels like there's an unnecessary amount of jargon that we can afford to simplify. I don't think we need to link to, e.g. the S5L8947 or the MDM9625 on the front page— the links to the [[Application Processor]] [[Baseband Device]] pages should be sufficient. (We can also probably remove the listing of each and every device under "Hardware" to further save space, but I can understand keeping those.) We also don't need to list every IMG3 or IMG4 tag. --[[User:Dialexio|Dialexio]] ([[User talk:Dialexio|talk]]) 16:29, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
why are we still arguing i and [[User:Windows Helpdesk|blackthund3r]] agreed that [[User:iH8sn0w|iH8sn0w]] is not a hacker ( he may be if he is the first to make the [[usb_control_msg(0xA1, 1) Exploit]] work ) but until then i think we need to document the people who are working on tool's to help jailbreak the iphone and ipod's of the world also lot's of jailbreak's where made by random people like the [[LibTiff]] and [[Ramdisk Hack]] and because they where not made by [[IPhone Dev Team]] there where not welcomed like on [[Talk:Ramdisk Hack]] --[[User:Liamchat|liamchat]] 15:50, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 
   
  +
:Hey there Dialexio, yes i completely agree with cleaning up the front page, as it is full of repeated garbage. what we could do is consolidate the hardware links to the device lists, i'll make a concept on my [[User:DanTheMann15/Sandbox|Sandbox]] so i can fully show you what i mean. and yeah, we do not need to link the basebands and application processors in the front page, it'll be just fine contained in it's own page but have it's link on the main page be '''Bolded''' to make it easy enough to see. as for the stuff at the bottom of the page, i don't see any real need to change it, though i might see something that needs attention as i comb through it. but overall, after you see what i have in mind, you may make the changes as you wish upon the next beta day. - Cheers! --[[User:DanTheMann15|DanTheMann15]] ([[User talk:DanTheMann15|talk]]) 06:27, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
the dev team were the first to implement [[usb_control_msg(0xA1, 1) Exploit]] discovered by pod2g into redsn0w and released on September 20t; ih8sn0w only mentioned after the fact that he then can include support a day later, and there are plenty of tools out only problem I see is ih8sn0w stuff isn't built very well --[[user:alpineflip|alpineflip]]
 
   
  +
::I like the effort you made on [[User:DanTheMann15/Sandbox/Main Page|your sandbox page]]! I hope you don't mind that I made a couple of additional edits that I think we can make, with some comments on why I thought the amendment was for the better. (If you don't like it, feel free to revert it and/or say something here.) --[[User:Dialexio|Dialexio]] ([[User talk:Dialexio|talk]]) 01:23, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
I'm going to go ahead and remove ih8sn0w for now since the general consensus here is that he doesn't belong in that group. Anyone that adds it back in, I will revert their change and point them to the discussion page since most of the people defending his position have not said anything in the discussion. --[[user:tsuehpsyde|tsuehpsyde]]
 
   
  +
:You have my approval on these changes, they look good, and the comments for anyone editing would be helpful to point them to the relevant page. once we are satisfied with the right Hardware side, we can turn on consolidating the left Software side so that the page is considerably shorter, as for the bottom of the page where Development and Help are, i don't see any immediate changes that i can suggest yet but if they come up i'll let you know, and feel free to make adjustments on the sandbox draft, it's what it's there for so we can see what the difference will look like. --[[User:DanTheMann15|DanTheMann15]] ([[User talk:DanTheMann15|talk]]) 03:12, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
So I am not with putting ih8sn0w's name in the hackers list but this guy needs sone appreciations , at least he made something for the jailbreak community that's why I am putting a new "category" called '''iPhone Hacks Developers''' so that ih8sn0w's name will be on this wiki , even if not in the hackers category . I hope this is OK for the most of you , I am gonna wait before posting it so that any one that doesn't like this idea will talk and post in here !! :-)
 
--[[User:ahmadlharb|<span style="color:#C20; font-weight:normal;">ahmadlharb</span>]]
 
   
  +
== Eliminating the firmware key links on the device lists ==
   
  +
I have a new change to propose,
Why do we need an 'iPhone Hacks Developers' section on the main page? There's already a section with applications (including sn0wbreeze), which when you click on them, tells you who developed them. Is there some dire need to have ih8sn0w on the main page? If so, I'm not seeing it. --[[user:tsuehpsyde|tsuehpsyde]]
 
   
  +
Mind cutting the firmware key links from the device lists (e.g [[List of iPhones]], [[List of iPads|iPads]] etc...) and replacing those links with a "See also" section at the bottom of the pages that has a link to [[Firmware Keys]] instead?
Honestly, iH8sn0w doesnt even deserve to be in that list either. That list title kinda means that he develops hacks which he does not. A more appropriate title would be "XPwn repackagers" --[[User:gamer765|gamer765]]
 
   
  +
I feel it would look MUCH cleaner since it looks messy having it tell the same firmware version twice on devices that have two or more identifiers.
I think he should personally. You have to remember he did more than just repackage xpwn. He created tools for late bootroms that were on 3.1.2 to be jailbroken on new firmwares, though it is tethered. I also think it should go into detail on what each "hacker" does for the community. --[[User:JacobVengeance|JacobVengeance]] 23:41, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 
   
  +
like the iPhone 5s here for example, which has two identifiers:
There is a difference between created and copied, unfortunately none of ih8sn0w's work is original. Like [[User:gamer765|gamer765]] mentioned his applications are listed on the wiki there doesn't need to be a separate category for his stuff or others it's not necessary IMO. --[[user:alpineflip|alpineflip]]
 
   
  +
==== CURRENT SETUP ====
All right guys, so the general consensus is that iH8sn0w will not be listed on the main page (yet). Let's put the question to rest now, please. :) --[[User:Dialexio|<span style="color:#C20; font-weight:normal;">Dialexio</span>]] 01:19, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 
  +
* Firmware:
  +
** Initial firmware: [[Innsbruck 11A466 (iPhone6,1)|7.0 (11A466)]], [[Innsbruck 11A466 (iPhone6,2)|7.0 (11A466)]]
  +
** Latest firmware: [[PeaceUpdate 16H62 (iPhone6,1)|12.5.5 (16H62)]], [[PeaceUpdate 16H62 (iPhone6,2)|12.5.5 (16H62)]]
   
  +
==== MY SUGGESTION ====
Okay, I think between us we have decided the following:
 
  +
'''Firmwares:'''
:iH8sn0w should NOT be listed as a hacker on the main page
 
  +
* Initial firmware: 7.0 (11A466)
:We need a page for ALL iPhone hacking scene developers for anyone that has contributed anything to hack / assist in hacking the iPhone
 
  +
* Latest firmware: 12.5.5 (16H62)
:This page is to be called '''iPhone Hacks Developers''' though I think we need to make that name a bit better (unless, of course, there s a general theme that people like this name)
 
   
  +
====== See also ====== (AT BOTTOM OF THE PAGE)
If anything was missed put let me know. Then we can present to the rest after -- [[User:Windows Helpdesk|blackthund3r]]
 
   
  +
[[Firmware Keys]]
Considering how mostly groups are releasing jailbreak tools only, i think that the new section should be named '''Jailbreak tool developers'''. --[[User:gamer765|gamer765]]
 
   
:I agree. While most of us agree that ih8Sn0w's work isn't completely original code, it's still quite a feat to make command-line (or source only!) tools readily usable by the masses. --[[User:Ryccardo|Ryccardo]] 12:33, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 
   
  +
---- Notes:
you all asked for a jailbreak tool section and i made one so all app's that let you talk to iboot or decrypt ipsw can be posted and linked to the [[Up_to_speed]] for people who want to learn how hack iphone and ipods so add those app to [[IPhone_hacking_utilities]] --[[User:Liamchat|liamchat]] 13:26, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 
  +
↓ we can also '''bold''' the versions and build numbers like this if we need to.
   
  +
'''Firmwares:'''
== Hardware section names ==
 
  +
* Initial firmware: '''7.0 (11A466)'''
  +
* Latest firmware: '''12.5.5 (16H62)'''
   
  +
let me know your thoughts, feedback is always good. --[[User:DanTheMann15|DanTheMann15]] ([[User talk:DanTheMann15|talk]]) [[User:DanTheMann15|DanTheMann15]] ([[User talk:DanTheMann15|talk]]) 07:52, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Chronic, you started a name change in the hardware section. Such changes should be agreed on first. It's not even complete. Either we change it everywhere or revert back to how it was (my opinion). I also never liked the iAbc2,6 notation. Nobody knows what that is. Other opinions? -- [[User:Http|http]] 12:08, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 
  +
:I personally like the key page links as they are, but also see why it’d be cleaner. I suppose it would look better if it’s just one listing. —[[User:IAdam1n|iAdam1n]] ([[User talk:IAdam1n|talk]]) 11:31, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 11:31, 30 September 2021

Archives
 • 2009 • 2010 • 2011 • 2012 • 2013 •

Baseband Chip Page Titles

For the baseband chip page titles, I think we should stick with the model number despite the marketing name. Pages:

--5urd 21:35, 8 May 2012 (MDT)

I'm leaning more towards the marketing names, since I think people are more familiar with them and they've been in use for a long time. We've always referred to the iPhone 2G's baseband as the "S-Gold 2" and the iPhone 3G/3GS's baseband as the "X-Gold 608." (By the way, it sounds like Qualcomm "markets" their chips by model number. [1]) --Dialexio 00:11, 9 May 2012 (MDT)
I created most of these newer pages and always used the model number (without space). So I agree with that in general. Changing old ones is a totally different story though, where we need more consent. I would be for it (and create a redirect on the marketing names). --http 01:52, 9 May 2012 (MDT)

Baseband downgrade possibility: Attempt for 04.11.08/04.12.01 to 04.10.01

0x1 There is no downgrade possibility; according to the most basis of fact in how baseband works as explained by dear MuscleNerd and there is signature checks as well as bootloader's chain of trust that I'm not going to repeat them again, but for this topic I start from iTunes error 1,-1,11

0x2 iTunes error 1,-1,11 : We will get this error whenever we want to do something with BB which is not allowed by apple. you can read about these error in detail from here[2]. Going deeper, this error raise by baseband's bootloader whenever you attempt to downgrade BB (in this case), this happens inside the NOR so this is why we can not exploit it easily from the outside. Another reason for this error (and in here the most important one that I wanted to discuss) is that apple no longer signing that firmware.

0x3 The situation that there is no BB installed on iPhone! : I could restore my iPhone4 in the case of there will be no BB at all. I called it reset my BB. There will be no Wifi, no BT. At the first time (a few months since I've started to work on) I thought it is dead (as apple confirmed this also). But I could restore it only to stock firmware with the latest one. So for who stays in 04.11.08 it may lead to do upgrade to 04.12.01 permanently with the latest iOS, now is 5.1.1 and before for me was 5.0.1, so be sure what you are doing and then go to reset the BB. So back to the game, if there was no BB then there is no bootloeader inside the NOR to stuck BB update process but I do not know that in this case what happened to "sectable" also known as "locktable" which is the master accountable to unlock the carrier, any way I think so only firmware signature checking by apple will be remain in "restore verify process" by iTunes. because as mentioned earlier, "currentBB"(BB to be updated) is allowed to be update by "comingBB" (BB to be updating to) only if : 1. "currentBB" < "comingBB" (= are you the most recent/lastest BB?) 2. "comingBB" is now signing by apple (=if so, does apple sign you? Are you eligible?) Huum... What happens if "currentBB"="null/zero/no matter"? Could we eliminate option (1) from the security check above in this case? So what next?

0x4 Track back to the issue lead us inside the bbfw file (ICE3_04.11.08_BOOT_02.13.Release) which contains four .fls files inside, and the most important one is psi_flash.fls who is in charge of security checks before handover the routines to stack.fls which is responsible for updating the baseband. This file does like NOR bootloader but fortunately it's outside the device so it is accessible but not such easy format to be understand by programmers. They are raw ROM based images for XMM6180 chip, ARM based and programmed in Thread-X, but the compiler is unknown; I will write about some disassembly notes using ida pro 6.1; by the way I leave my iPhone with no BB trying to find out and break the trust chains in the above files in order to bypass the bootloader security checks which may let us to downgrade to 04.10.01 which is currently unlocked by Gevey. Keep in mind that if this solution works..., it will need the SHSH for downgrading the iOS firmware to do reset the BB. I heard that iPhoneDevTeam are going to release the new version of Redsn0w which there will be no need to restore by iTunes but I do not know if the baseband approaches supposed to be addressed or it will work like iFaith that is basically bypass (preserve) BB, any way if I found this article useful I will note about disassembly and possibility approach as well as BB reset to share with any followers. --Kambiz 07:49, 13 May 2012 (MDT)K.N

Bluetooth Chip on iPhone 5

Is there any confirmation of the Bluetooth chip used in the iPhone 5? If there is, can we edit this page and add it? --5urd 10:04, 8 October 2012 (MDT)

Chipworks analyzed the iPhone 5's Murata Wi-Fi module and determined it uses the BCM4334. I'll add it to the Main Page now. --Dialexio 20:35, 8 October 2012 (MDT)

Adding vulnerability to main page

The page CVE-2013-0964 is currently orphaned. I think it would fit under the "Vulnerabilities and Exploits" subheading. Can someone with adequate permission make the change? 0x56 (talk) 03:52, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Added. --http (talk) 00:53, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Update for new devices

Somebody should update the main page (table) for the 5s and 5c --Phyrrus9 (talk) 21:14, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

No need. It says "iPhone 4S and newer". --iAdam1n (talk) 22:01, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Permission

Permission to add pangu8? Or should we wait until a Cydia version comes out? --Awesomebing1 (talk) 15:52, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

It has already been added and is fine IMO. I would state that it's SSH only though. --iAdam1n (talk) 16:22, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

All of the Watch product images?

So I was looking for Apple product images and found this interesting document that has links to all of the (current) product images. Since the Apple Watch has so many models, editions, colors, etc., would it be worthwhile to upload all the images listed from the document? So far I've found this one. (Apple Watch 42mm, Stainless Steel buckle) --Citrusui (talk) 18:01, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

It's not a great idea to upload images from Apple's website in general, since they're copyrighted by Apple, unless you can make a decent argument that using a copyrighted image in a particular article is is fair use. Britta (talk) 09:01, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Removal of Apple TV 3G from "Latest Firmware" Section?

Apparently, the Apple TV 3G has not received any updates from Apple for a long time and looks like it will not get any in the future. So, should we remove it from the "Latest Firmware" section on the Main Page? Any other thoughts? --Tp1194045441 (talk) 03:51, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

It's still been sold so it should stay as it's still "active" for this reason. --iAdam1n (talk) 22:34, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Cleanup

This page has a lot of links... It almost looks intimidating. That's not exactly an impression you want to leave on a first-time visitor. I'd like to clean it up, but I'm not entirely sure on what to cut out. I currently have everything in "Hardware" underneath the basebands in mind, and some of the definitions (be honest, how popular of a topic do you think iBEC is?). Any thoughts on what can or should not be cut? --Dialexio (talk) 21:09, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

I think we should remove links to pages that have not been created yet. We can always add them back if/when made. --iAdam1n (talk) 22:33, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

KPP

Is there a reason why a KPP page has not been created? It would be useful to many... --Detiac 15:19, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

It would certainly be useful and something that should be on the wiki, but I don't think any active users are knowledgeable enough on the topic to provide a writeup. --Dialexio (talk) 02:23, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Rename Bad Stuff section

I don't know what we could rename it to, but it doesn't come off very well --Nullpixel (talk) 17:26, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Although the name is accurate, "Bad Stuff" does sound a little... off-kilter. Maybe something like "Malicious/Cautionary Topics?" --Dialexio (talk) 02:23, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Sorry for the late response. I agree, this is a better name. --Nullpixel (talk) 16:10, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Various Software

I feel like the Various Software section should either be segmented into smaller sections (Downgrading Utilities, Package Managers, etc.) or not exist at all -- and in the former case, would most likely not be under the section Various Software. Any thoughts? --wxblank (talk) 16:02, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Firmware Status style.

I am proposing a change to the firmware status table, to pack-in more info into a smaller space while also being more future-proof.

i believe having the table in this style will improve not only the aesthetic of the table, but also be able to handle more devices in the future.

Exhibit A

This is what we have now:

Device Apple TV (4th generation) and newer Apple Watch Series 1 and newer HomePod iPad (5th generation) and newer
iPad Air 2
iPad mini 4
iPad Pro (12.9-inch, 9.7-inch, 12.9-inch 2nd generation, 10.5-inch)
iPhone 6s through iPhone X
iPod touch (7th generation)
iPad Air (3rd generation)
iPad mini (5th generation)
iPad Pro (11-inch, 12.9-inch 3rd generation)
iPhone XR and newer
Latest
Public Firmware
13.4.6 (17L570) 6.2.6 (17T620) 13.4.6 (17L570) 13.5.1 (17F80)
Jailbreak available? Yes
(checkra1n)[1][2]
No Yes
(checkra1n)
No
(N/A)
Latest
Beta Firmwares
13.4.8 beta 3 (17M5558b)
14.0 beta (18J5313t)
6.2.8 beta 3 (17U5559d)
7.0 beta (Series 3+) (18R5310a)
N/A 13.6 beta 3 (17G5059c)
14.0 beta (18A5301v)
  1. ^ Apple TV HD only but supports Apple TV 4K with hardware modfications
  2. ^ Check the "Allow untested iOS/iPadOS/tvOS versions" checkbox in the options view to bypass the version check.

Exhibit B

This is the style i propose we replace Exhibit A with:

Product Linup Apple TV HomePod Apple Watch iPhone iPad iPad Air iPad Pro iPad mini iPod touch
Supported Apple TV HD
and newer
Series 1
and newer
iPhone 6s
and newer
5th Generation
and newer
iPad Air 2
and newer
12.9-inch (2016)
and newer
iPad mini 4
and newer
7th Generation
Latest
Public Firmwares
13.4.6 (17L570) 6.2.6 (17T620) 13.5.1 (17F80)
Jailbreak availability Yes
(checkra1n)[1][2]
No Yes* (checkra1n)[1]
*except for devices with the A12 or newer SoC's.
Latest
Beta Firmwares
13.4.8 beta 3 (17M5558b) N/A 6.2.8 beta 3 (17U5559d) 13.6 beta 3 (17G5059c)
14.0 beta (18J5313t) N/A 7.0 beta (18R5310a)*
*Series 3 and newer only.
14.0 beta (18A5301v)
  1. ^ a b Check the "Allow untested iOS/iPadOS/tvOS versions" checkbox in the options view to bypass the version check.
  2. ^ Apple TV HD only, but can support the Apple TV 4K with some hardware modifications.

I am open to comments or suggestions - DanTheMann15 (talk) 23:11, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

I agree and prefer the new style. It sucks having devices listed twice but that would change once watchOS 7 is out of beta. Maybe though we could just add a note under the table that watchOS 7 beta’s require series 3 or newer and not have the second list. IMO that’d be better. —iAdam1n (talk) 00:16, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

That sounds like a good idea, and the note actually fits inside the table! i've changed Exhibit B to reflect this. - DanTheMann15 (talk) 01:13, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

I made the edit before seeing the talk page, oops. I'll leave it like that for now. Admanny (talk) 06:09, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

I like the "Jailbreak availability" text, but on the other hand though many people ask that question: is a "Jailbreak available?", i edited Exhibit B so everyone can see how it looks, get other opinions on it, but overall im down with either way. - DanTheMann15 (talk) 08:00, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

I think "available?" makes more sense to be honest with the yes and no answers. --iAdam1n (talk) 13:10, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
I changed it because it's unconventional for labels in a chart to be written in the form of a question. But, this is a small wiki anyway, so if the consensus sways towards keeping the question, that's fine. I'm still with keeping it as "availability". Admanny (talk) 19:55, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Mac in the jailbreak table

Why is this in the table? Macs aren't exactly locked up in a BSD jail like iOS devices; they have security to prevent modifying system files by default, but Macs are a more open platform and SIP can be disabled to edit said files. You don't need to run some jailbreaking utility to e.g. change around some system icons in macOS. I presume the intent was to say bridgeOS on Macs with the T2 are susceptible to jailbreaking per the footnote, but the "Supported" row points to "All Macs with the M1". None of the M1 Macs have a T2 chip. The information provided is also for macOS, not bridgeOS. --Dialexio (talk) 08:24, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

That can be fixed but it was added as it's "firmware status" not just "jailbreak status" as should be there. --iAdam1n (talk) 11:40, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

HTTPS links on firmwares and OTA's that are hosted on "updates.cdn-apple.com"

I'm writing this topic because Dialexio hasn't been using https. https has been used here on the wiki regularly since 2019 when adding new firmware links that are hosted on Apple's CDN, which host's all of Apple's firmwares released since April 2018, such as iOS 11.3.1 and newer.

back when apple was still using appldnld.apple.com, adding https (https://secure-appldnld.apple.com) would make the links unreliable or not work at all.

but now with http://updates-http.cdn-apple.com, it works just fine to switch to (https://updates.cdn-apple.com).

it is easy as pie to switch the links to use https by using a good text-editing program that has a "find and replace" function. like Notepad++ or Gedit.


is there any good reason we shouldn't be using https on the newer firmwares hosted on Apple's CDN?

- DanTheMann15 (talk) 22:32, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

(This should probably be on The iPhone Wiki:Community portal instead, but oh well.) It kinda boils down to personal preference; to my understanding, there was never any sort of formal agreement on this. A user simply started converting some links to HTTPS, and I just let them do their thing since I do see benefits of using HTTPS. (At the end of the day though, you're still going to get the same file, especially if you verify its hash.) But personally, I'd rather keep the links the same way Apple provided them— if they gave us an HTTP link, that's what I'll add, and if they gave an HTTPS link, that's what I'll add. I'm not opposed to others changing the links I post to HTTPS as it's still Apple hosting and providing the download links, but I don't feel we should have to go out of our way to add one more step to an already tedious task. You can make an argument that it's for consistency, but that logic can also be used towards converting HTTPS links back to HTTP, and we would also trim the URLs for the older IPSWs so those look more consistent with newer, pre cdn-apple.com releases. --Dialexio (talk) 00:21, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

i understand where you are coming from, but i will continue to use https on the firmware links i post, since there are more advantages than the other way around, albeit the possible reason why apple gives us http links is likely because https requires valid certificates, which for some reason not everybody has. also it's important to note about HTTPS-Only on some major browsers so http links will not work for those who have that setting enabled. and like i said above, it takes me a fraction of a second to convert the links to https, thanks to Notepad++. perhaps you could add a setting that you can enable in the OTA Catalog Parser that would automatically convert links to https when parsing the links to save time. - DanTheMann15 (talk) 18:47, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

well i'll be darned, apple started providing https links for OTA downloads through pallas now! that'll save time on links going forward, i wonder if they'll do the same on IPSW's, only time will tell. - DanTheMann15 (talk) 21:27, 17 Jul 2021 (UTC)

Cleanup

Can we clean up the front page? It feels like there's an unnecessary amount of jargon that we can afford to simplify. I don't think we need to link to, e.g. the S5L8947 or the MDM9625 on the front page— the links to the Application Processor Baseband Device pages should be sufficient. (We can also probably remove the listing of each and every device under "Hardware" to further save space, but I can understand keeping those.) We also don't need to list every IMG3 or IMG4 tag. --Dialexio (talk) 16:29, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Hey there Dialexio, yes i completely agree with cleaning up the front page, as it is full of repeated garbage. what we could do is consolidate the hardware links to the device lists, i'll make a concept on my Sandbox so i can fully show you what i mean. and yeah, we do not need to link the basebands and application processors in the front page, it'll be just fine contained in it's own page but have it's link on the main page be Bolded to make it easy enough to see. as for the stuff at the bottom of the page, i don't see any real need to change it, though i might see something that needs attention as i comb through it. but overall, after you see what i have in mind, you may make the changes as you wish upon the next beta day. - Cheers! --DanTheMann15 (talk) 06:27, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
I like the effort you made on your sandbox page! I hope you don't mind that I made a couple of additional edits that I think we can make, with some comments on why I thought the amendment was for the better. (If you don't like it, feel free to revert it and/or say something here.) --Dialexio (talk) 01:23, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
You have my approval on these changes, they look good, and the comments for anyone editing would be helpful to point them to the relevant page. once we are satisfied with the right Hardware side, we can turn on consolidating the left Software side so that the page is considerably shorter, as for the bottom of the page where Development and Help are, i don't see any immediate changes that i can suggest yet but if they come up i'll let you know, and feel free to make adjustments on the sandbox draft, it's what it's there for so we can see what the difference will look like. --DanTheMann15 (talk) 03:12, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Eliminating the firmware key links on the device lists

I have a new change to propose,

Mind cutting the firmware key links from the device lists (e.g List of iPhones, iPads etc...) and replacing those links with a "See also" section at the bottom of the pages that has a link to Firmware Keys instead?

I feel it would look MUCH cleaner since it looks messy having it tell the same firmware version twice on devices that have two or more identifiers.

like the iPhone 5s here for example, which has two identifiers:

CURRENT SETUP

MY SUGGESTION

Firmwares:

  • Initial firmware: 7.0 (11A466)
  • Latest firmware: 12.5.5 (16H62)

====== See also ====== (AT BOTTOM OF THE PAGE)

Firmware Keys



Notes:

↓ we can also bold the versions and build numbers like this if we need to.

Firmwares:

  • Initial firmware: 7.0 (11A466)
  • Latest firmware: 12.5.5 (16H62)

let me know your thoughts, feedback is always good. --DanTheMann15 (talk) DanTheMann15 (talk) 07:52, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

I personally like the key page links as they are, but also see why it’d be cleaner. I suppose it would look better if it’s just one listing. —iAdam1n (talk) 11:31, 30 September 2021 (UTC)