> If they were helping Apple, then I doubt Apple would be suing them.
There are a number of security researchers who use Corellium to find bugs in iOS. Corellium themselves have submitted vulnerabilities using Apple’s bug bounty program.
There are a number of security researchers who use Corellium to find bugs in iOS. Corellium themselves have submitted vulnerabilities using Apple’s bug bounty program.
Same reason I don’t fault Apple for suing companies who make products to run iOS / MacOS on non-Apple hardware.
I'll bet this isn't just about IP. I strongly suspect that it's about the brand.
It's up to Apple to decide if they want to make a virtualized iOS available for security researchers on the web.
That’s pretty hairy stuff. Technically cool, but definitely sketchy.
Not quite. The optional "modifications" are pretty much the small byte patches in the kernel and bootloader which are normally done in a jailbreak. It is similar to how "Parallels Tools" is automatically loaded; Not entirely required, but makes the experience better.
Perhaps they’re wrong, but I doubt that they’d lie.
Edit people in the rest of the thread are saying that a modified iOS is provided by them
So whether or not they're unlawfully redistributing iOS is irrelevant to the case. The DMCA crap is the interesting bit. And if Apple decides to sue for simple copyright infringement, Corellium could turn their product into bring-your-own-IPSW, with instructions/patches/whatever to modify the image so it'll run on their emulator.
As for the copyright thing, yes, they could ask the user to upload the ipsw (but still i don't see the difference between user doing it and them doing it, it'll end up in the same place), but there would be no need for modification instructions. Modifications are done dynamically, they're not pre-applied into a custom ipsw.