Open-Source App Lets Anyone Create a Virtual Army of Hackintoshes (vice.com) 31
samleecole writes from a report via Motherboard: MacOS is generally intended as a desktop operating system, and while it's a very functional operating system, Apple expects it to run on a single piece of hardware. As any developer or infrastructure architect can tell you, virtualization is an impressive technique that allows programmers and infrastructure pros to expand reach and scale things up far beyond a single user. A Github project that has gotten a bit of attention in recent months aims to make MacOS scalable in ways that it has basically never been.
Its secret weapon is a serial code generator: Docker-OSX has the ability to generate serial codes for unique pieces of MacOS hardware, and its main developer, an open-source developer and security researcher who goes by the pseudonym Sick Codes, recently released a standalone serial code generator that can replicate codes for nonexistent devices by the thousands. Just type in a command, and it will set up a CSV file full of serial codes.
"You can generate hundreds and thousands of serial numbers, just like that," Sick Codes, who used a pseudonym due to the nature of his work, said. "And it just generates a massive list." A valid serial code allows you to use Apple-based tools such as iMessage, iCloud, and the App Store inside of MacOS. It's the confirmation that you're using something seen as valid in the eyes of Apple. "I actually went through, and I've got like 15 iMac Pros in my Apple account now, and it says that they're all valid for iMessage," the creator said.
Its secret weapon is a serial code generator: Docker-OSX has the ability to generate serial codes for unique pieces of MacOS hardware, and its main developer, an open-source developer and security researcher who goes by the pseudonym Sick Codes, recently released a standalone serial code generator that can replicate codes for nonexistent devices by the thousands. Just type in a command, and it will set up a CSV file full of serial codes.
"You can generate hundreds and thousands of serial numbers, just like that," Sick Codes, who used a pseudonym due to the nature of his work, said. "And it just generates a massive list." A valid serial code allows you to use Apple-based tools such as iMessage, iCloud, and the App Store inside of MacOS. It's the confirmation that you're using something seen as valid in the eyes of Apple. "I actually went through, and I've got like 15 iMac Pros in my Apple account now, and it says that they're all valid for iMessage," the creator said.
Not sure this matters (Score:5, Interesting)
This isn't an exploit, it's something most computers allow you to do. At worst it's messing with Apple's data, but they should be able to cross-reference it with a database of hardware they've produced, if they need to.
It's not clear Apple wants to stop this either, since it could be useful for developers.
Re: (Score:3)
Apple doesn't do anything more than cursory S/N validation, fortunately. Tools like this might encourage them to be less forgiving. But somebody's always got to take things too far.
Random Serial Numbers (Score:3)
They are supposed to switch to (pseudo-)random serial numbers - as Dell/HP do on (some of?) their devices, soon.
One reason may be keeping some secrets, one may be security and one may be exactly this...
Re: (Score:3)
Well maybe people's AWS account can now include Hackintosh.
Re: (Score:3)
It's not clear Apple wants to stop this either, since it could be useful for developers.
Ha! Apple is actively hostile to developers and power users. Things that are trivial on Linux and BSD, are completely unsupported on macOS and/or actively prevented in the name of security.
E.g., want a minimal copy-on-write chroot or macOS container for isolated builds? Sorry, can't have that, because that might compromise system integrity - even though it wouldn't.
Apple could enable developer and power user workflows that rival Linux/BSD and keep their security, but they don't want to.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm after spending three seconds with you and I already want to slit my wrists.
Fuck of..
Re: (Score:2)
(That was a reply to the spammer who has now been modded to oblivion. Ffs /., fix your code!)
Reason for recent serial code change? (Score:5, Interesting)
Maybe this is part of the reason Apple is changing their serial code scheme. [slashdot.org] That and hiding the slave labour...
its only a matter of time (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
That's all that Apple has ever had, their army of lawyers.
They created the modern computing world. Back in the beginning of the Graphical User Interface they sued and ran most of the innovators out of business. Delivering control of the GUI to the only entity with deep enough pockets to defeat them, Microsoft.
There was the GEM Desktop, Geoworks, various other GUI schemes and desktop systems. Apple's penchant for hiring lawyers drove them all under.
Windows is Apple's fault.
Re:its only a matter of time (Score:4, Informative)
I'm sure Commodore Amiga would be surprised to hear that. All Apple's fault you say? And while we're on the blame game who does one blame for the failure of NeXT? Yes Steve Jobs and the bulk of his OS went to Apple, but it's still a different beast than what NeXT Computing sold. And lets not forget OS/2. I'm sure with revisionist history we can blame that on Apple as well. And Be Inc? Yup lets blame that on Apple, and not their CEO.
Re: (Score:2)
The Apple v DRI lawsuit over GEM's look and feel is interesting. On the one hand GEM V1 was a pretty close copy of the original Mac UI, appearing very similar. On the other hand, the changes that Apple forced on them were ridiculous and went way beyond it just looking similar. They actually had to ditch overlapping windows in the main desktop file manager, instead limiting you to either one or two panes that took up the whole screen. Apps were, fortunately, unaffected.
Eventually they went back to overlappin
Re: (Score:2)
>They actually had to ditch overlapping windows
Overlapping windows were one of the things that Lisa had that Xerox's interface didn't . . .
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
If we hadn't seen the look and feel lawsuits, we'd have probably seen third party OSes inspired by the best of Apple, Commodore, Acorn, etc, on the PC. We didn't, because nobody wanted to be sued.
We did. Nobody wanted it. BeOS [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:1)
Now we've gone full-circle, and we're talking about a BSD derivative claiming some sort of intellectual property rights to something academia created to be free of that sort of Black Helicopters at Dawn attack-lawyerism.
still No nVidia, only some ati cards, soon to drop (Score:2)
still No nVidia, only some ati cards, soon to drop x86-64
Comment removed (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Apple might look the other way from this system for devs but not for a commercial enterprise.
Re: (Score:2)
Beeper is an in development app that is supposed to unify messaging services. Their current plan for allowing use of iMessage involve jailbroken iOS devices. This could be much cheaper!
Apple might look the other way from this system for devs but not for a commercial enterprise.
Or alternatively, they might buy the company and use that for iMessage on Android and Windows.
Could go either way
Re: Beeper is gonna love this! (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
As far as I can tell though iMessage is almost entirely useless if you don't have a SIM card and phone number attached to it.
Having used a number of iPod Touches over the years - with one sitting around as a backup - this isn't true. Touches, of course, don't have SIMs or phone numbers and work just fine with iMessage.
Re: (Score:2)
You stopped reading after the first sentence, didn't you? They mean on a practical level, not a technical one. And gave examples.
Re: (Score:2)
well done ... (Score:2)
now we just need a reason to actually want to run iMessage, iCloud, and the App Store.
just joking, nicely done.
nt (Score:2)
Now taking bets on how fast Apple will invoke the DMCA to get this shut down.
See also Apple v. Psystar.
Agreed that it doesn't matter any more (Score:3)
Apple's model always was to make people buy over-priced and under powered hardware in order to get the OS. I recall being a dedicated Apple user and finally buying a mail order PC running some version of Windows. Probably XP. And being simply amazed by the performance for a price maybe one half or less of what I had been buying previously.
The strategy problem they had is that hardware and OS are two independent product lines pulling in different directions. If you are the OS product manager, you want to sell to as many OEMs as possible. If you are the hardware product manager you want to limit or eliminate the licensing, because that will (as long as the OS keeps its charm) let you keep prices up.
Hardware of course won out. But the corollary was that Apple basically ended up refusing to sell to the people who wanted computers. It could not meet the demand, no single company ever could have, and it would not let anyone else.
Eventually hackintoshes became a thing, and we had guerilla warfare on this which Apple, despite the move to Intel, basically was winning. But as this progressed, MacOS became increasingly irrelevant, partly because Apple was now focussed on other markets than computing, and partly because as a consequence of the total alignment of the computing division on the hardware model, market share had fallen to levels where it just doesn't matter much.
And so hackintoshing is a niche within a niche. Meanwhile, Windows 10 is at least the equal of OSX. The various Linux desktops are too for that matter. People who are used to running OSX keep desperatly wishing Apple would give them a reasonably priced powerful tower.
Which of course they will not. They have understood completely Michael Porter's point: that profitability is found at dominant market share levels, but also at niche levels. They have gone for the niche, and become largely irrelevant in computing. There is no reason why they should not continue with this indefinitely.
The reason they will go to their own processors is this same mindset. Get a unique bit of hardware, make it essential to running the OS, then we can once more prevent even the tiny hackintosh movement ever being a threat. Force everyone to buy our hardware to get the OS.
The iphone strategy is a bit similar, except they did decide this time to meet the demand by outsourcing instead of refusing to sell to people who wanted them.
I think I'm not at all unusual in having followed this saga first with dismay and later with contempt. Microsoft and Windows had their dark sides, some of MS actions and pronouncements were appalling and anti-competitive. Think about Ballmer's rage against Linux. So it took quite some doing for Apple to persuade enthusiasts like myself to regard them as being fundamentally contemptible in their strategy of reducing choice and keeping prices at absurd levels for what you got.
Now we are at the point where hackintoshes are easy and predictable to make. Apple is still contorting itself to make even that tiny niche segment non viable. But the rest of us, who would have bought a decent tower at a fair price and really were enthusiastic about the OS, well, we don't care any more.
Losing us was a great achievement. It really took work. But they managed it, and now this news which I would have been very interested in a decade or so back, now its a shrug. Do what you want guys, who cares? I have no interest in your OS now.