Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Apr 5, 2013, 09:49 AM   #1
MacRumors
macrumors bot
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Apple to Alter VPN On Demand Behavior in iOS 6.1 and Later Due to VirnetX Lawsuit




The Loop points to a new Apple support document disclosing that the company will be changing the behavior of the VPN On Demand feature on iOS devices running iOS 6.1 or later through a software update to be released later this month. The changes have been necessitated by a $368 million judgment against Apple late last year in a patent lawsuit brought by VirnetX.
Quote:
Devices using iOS 6.1 and later with VPN On Demand configured to "Always" will behave as if they were configured with the "Establish if needed" option. The device will establish a VPN On Demand connection only if it is unable to resolve the DNS name of the host it is trying to reach. This change will be distributed in an update later this month.
The support document outlines a number of scenarios in which this may cause difficulties for users, including when contacting servers that present different internal and external content or which resolve externally but can't be contacted.

Apple suggests that users who experience these issues turn on VPN manually as needed for the time being, a potentially significant inconvenience for users needing to make extensive use of the feature. Virtual private networking (VPN), which is most commonly used by corporate users to access company networks, allows a user to securely connect to a private network via public networks as if his or her device were directly on the private network.

Apple says that it will address the issue with other alternatives in a future software update, but has given no indication on what options will be available to users and when that update may appear.

Article Link: Apple to Alter VPN On Demand Behavior in iOS 6.1 and Later Due to VirnetX Lawsuit
MacRumors is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2013, 09:59 AM   #2
ArtOfWarfare
macrumors 603
 
ArtOfWarfare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Send a message via Skype™ to ArtOfWarfare
Come again?

I don't know what this article is talking about - is it going to have an impact on me as a regular iOS user? Should I not update to iOS 6.1 to avoid having a feature taken away?
ArtOfWarfare is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2013, 10:06 AM   #3
AZREOSpecialist
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
A patent troll wins a $368M judgment against Apple, forcing Apple to change its software, but Apple can't get a final verdict and judgment in the obvious copying of Apple's products by Samsung? Seriously? Our system is totally messed up.
__________________
2009 Mac Pro Quad Xeon W3580 @ 3.3 GHz, 16 GB RAM, 2 TB RAID 5/RocketRAID 4320, Corsair P256 SSD Boot Drive, EVGA GTX-285
2012 MacBook Pro Retina 2.6 GHz, 16 GB RAM, 512 GB SSD
AZREOSpecialist is offline   22 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2013, 10:13 AM   #4
macs4nw
macrumors 68020
 
macs4nw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: On Safari…..
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZREOSpecialist View Post
A patent troll wins a $368M judgment against Apple, forcing Apple to change its software, but Apple can't get a final verdict and judgment in the obvious copying of Apple's products by Samsung? Seriously? Our system is totally messed up.
Different circumstances, but no doubt frustrating to APPLE.
macs4nw is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2013, 10:13 AM   #5
Rocketman
macrumors 603
 
Rocketman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Claremont, CA
$368m is a relatively large sum for a feature used by a minority of users and using a protocol used by a subset of those users. I can see why Apple would rather truncate it than license it. Perhaps VirnetX could keep in mind the down payment Apple is paying and offer lower cost licensing going forward.

Rocketman
__________________
Think Different-ly!
All 357 R or D House jobs bills over 4 years died in the D Senate, ordered by the D President. Buy a model rocket here: http://v-serv.com/usr/instaship-visual.htm Thanks.
Rocketman is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2013, 10:14 AM   #6
TheHateMachine
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Houston, TX
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZREOSpecialist View Post
A patent troll wins a $368M judgment against Apple, forcing Apple to change its software, but Apple can't get a final verdict and judgment in the obvious copying of Apple's products by Samsung? Seriously? Our system is totally messed up.
It is messed up when Apple loses but working fine when they win. Got it.
__________________
I own stuff that is cool and fits my needs.
TheHateMachine is offline   21 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2013, 10:19 AM   #7
jonAppleSeed
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
VirnetX designed VPN on demand, and boy did they patent it
jonAppleSeed is offline   10 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2013, 10:19 AM   #8
Glideslope
macrumors 68020
 
Glideslope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: NY
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocketman View Post
$368m is a relatively large sum for a feature used by a minority of users and using a protocol used by a subset of those users. I can see why Apple would rather truncate it than license it. Perhaps VirnetX could keep in mind the down payment Apple is paying and offer lower cost licensing going forward.

Rocketman
That it is. I'm curious as to what Apple earns on it's 130 Billion in Off Shore investments in a 6m period? I'm sure the Cash Hoard is generating a nice slush fund for for these harassment suits.
__________________
" A leader leads by example. Not by force." Sun Tzu
Glideslope is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2013, 10:24 AM   #9
scaredpoet
macrumors 603
 
scaredpoet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtOfWarfare View Post
Come again?

I don't know what this article is talking about - is it going to have an impact on me as a regular iOS user? Should I not update to iOS 6.1 to avoid having a feature taken away?
No, it won't have an impact on you as a regular user. But it'll be a headache for certain IT folks if they are big on locking down BYODs.

VPN On Demand is set up on a certificate-level... basically, your workplace or whatever you're working on sets up a VPN and configures your iPhone to use it (or, requires you to configure it). And in that configuration, sets up a rule where certain websites, e-mail accounts, or other connections to certain domains require that the VPN get turned on, automatically.

This usually happens if you work at some place that handles sensitive information (top secret stuff, medical records, social security numbers, things you don't want leaking out), AND allows users to access that data over mobile devices.

Apparently, VirnetX managed to patent rule lists. Go figure.

To get around the issue, Apple is basically not honoring those automatic-turn-on rules, unless something happens at the server end to reject non-VPN'ed connections, first.


If this doesn't sound like anything you understand, or your workplace doesn't require you to use VPNs, then this definitely doesn't affect you at all, and you don't need to worry about it.
__________________
If you're not a clairvoyant, then you shouldn't be speaking for a dead guy.
I'm here to talk about Apple stuff, and related tech stuff. Your political beliefs? I really couldn't care less about.
scaredpoet is offline   14 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2013, 10:35 AM   #10
AZREOSpecialist
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHateMachine View Post
It is messed up when Apple loses but working fine when they win. Got it.
Who is "they"? VirnetX is a patent troll - they don't make any products, just hold patents so they can sue companies and make money. That is okay with you?
__________________
2009 Mac Pro Quad Xeon W3580 @ 3.3 GHz, 16 GB RAM, 2 TB RAID 5/RocketRAID 4320, Corsair P256 SSD Boot Drive, EVGA GTX-285
2012 MacBook Pro Retina 2.6 GHz, 16 GB RAM, 512 GB SSD
AZREOSpecialist is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2013, 10:37 AM   #11
Masterkona
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Why doesn't Apple just buy VirnetX? A controlling stake would only cost them $600 million, and it would cost them less than $1 billion to just buy the company.
Masterkona is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2013, 10:37 AM   #12
TheIguana
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
The sheer fact that Apple's own software engineers testified that they did not spend any time determining if an software patents existed for the systems they were building is pretty telling. If one of the largest software companies in the world doesn't even bother looking to see if software patents exist when developing a new technology than bluntly what is the point in their existence? Other than to feed the insatiable need patent trolls have to plunder.
TheIguana is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2013, 10:47 AM   #13
Stella
macrumors 603
 
Stella's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheIguana View Post
The sheer fact that Apple's own software engineers testified that they did not spend any time determining if an software patents existed for the systems they were building is pretty telling. If one of the largest software companies in the world doesn't even bother looking to see if software patents exist when developing a new technology than bluntly what is the point in their existence? Other than to feed the insatiable need patent trolls have to plunder.
I'm not surprised: It is not the job of a software engineer to sift through patents to determine if they are being used in the code.
__________________
Hardware / Software: The right tools for the job - be it Apple or otherwise.
Stella is offline   12 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2013, 10:55 AM   #14
epmatsw
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheIguana View Post
The sheer fact that Apple's own software engineers testified that they did not spend any time determining if an software patents existed for the systems they were building is pretty telling. If one of the largest software companies in the world doesn't even bother looking to see if software patents exist when developing a new technology than bluntly what is the point in their existence? Other than to feed the insatiable need patent trolls have to plunder.
I'm pretty sure the idea behind a patent is that it's supposed to be for something that you couldn't trivially implement by mistake. The fact that Apple is just removing the code for it and never bothered to attempt to gain a patent on it themselves speaks to how trivial this patent is.
__________________
MBP|OSX 10.9|C2D 2.26 ghz|8GB RAM|500GB HD+120GB SSD
iPhone 5|iOS7
epmatsw is offline   7 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2013, 10:57 AM   #15
spacemanspifff
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: SPACE
 
$368 Million

Right now, I wish I owned VirnetX, if it's not a PLC or whatever you American types call them over there.
spacemanspifff is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2013, 11:03 AM   #16
macintologist
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZREOSpecialist View Post
Who is "they"? VirnetX is a patent troll - they don't make any products, just hold patents so they can sue companies and make money. That is okay with you?
Yea but in order to get the patent, they had to buy it from the folks that originally invented it. All that matters is that the inventor was compensated for inventing something.
macintologist is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2013, 11:08 AM   #17
till213
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZREOSpecialist View Post
Who is "they"? VirnetX is a patent troll - they don't make any products, just hold patents so they can sue companies and make money. That is okay with you?
Suchis the ("your" US patent) law. That is okay with you, isn't it?
till213 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2013, 11:11 AM   #18
camnchar
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: SLC, Utah
Send a message via AIM to camnchar
$368 million for this. Seriously.
__________________
Apple //c, 1 MHz, 128k RAM, 5.25" floppy drive, 1-button mouse
camnchar is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2013, 11:17 AM   #19
Dave.UK
macrumors 6502a
 
Dave.UK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Kent, UK
“For years Apple refused to pay fair value for the VirnetX patents,” Doug Cawley, a lawyer with McKool Smith in Dallas who represents VirnetX, said in closing arguments. “Apple says they don’t infringe. But Apple developers testified that they didn’t pay any attention to anyone’s patents when developing their system.”

Apple was given the option to licence but refused. They went to court and lost.

Apple cant have it all ways.

----------

(Judgement against Apple) Cue 500+ posts about the patent system being broken, needs reformed, stupid patent system, patent trolls, this shouldn't even be patentable, etc.

(Judgement for Apple) Cue 500+ posts about patent system working, "die _______ die!", intellectual property should be protected, serves them right, other companies should innovate rather than copy, etc.
Dave.UK is offline   10 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2013, 11:29 AM   #20
itickings
macrumors 6502a
 
itickings's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave.UK View Post
(Judgement against Apple) Cue 500+ posts about the patent system being broken, needs reformed, stupid patent system, patent trolls, this shouldn't even be patentable, etc.

(Judgement for Apple) Cue 500+ posts about patent system working, "die _______ die!", intellectual property should be protected, serves them right, other companies should innovate rather than copy, etc.
They are not really mutually exclusive, you know...
You're likely to find a nice mix of both in hot topics.
__________________
Rawr!
itickings is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2013, 11:43 AM   #21
BC2009
macrumors 68000
 
BC2009's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonAppleSeed View Post
VirnetX designed VPN on demand, and boy did they patent it
That's the weird thing.... It would seem they designed "VPN Always", but "VPN on Demand" somehow evades their patent.

I'm surprised that Apple is not appealing this. I'm even more surprised that the damages approach what Apple was awarded from Samsung in their lawsuit. In one case you have outright copying and infringement of several patents and trade dress and in the other you have a specific option on a specific feature used by a fraction of iOS users.

Seems to me that an appeal is in order.
BC2009 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2013, 11:46 AM   #22
TouchMint.com
macrumors 65816
 
TouchMint.com's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Phoenix
I am guessing this is a bigger problem for iPads than iPhones?
__________________
TouchMint.com iOS App Site
Adventure To Fate iOS RPG Game Site
Indie iOS Game: Adventure To Fate : A Quest To The Core JRPG

TouchMint.com is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2013, 11:49 AM   #23
Dave.UK
macrumors 6502a
 
Dave.UK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Kent, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by BC2009 View Post

Seems to me that an appeal is in order.
Apple already has and lost.
Dave.UK is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2013, 11:53 AM   #24
SPUY767
macrumors 68000
 
SPUY767's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHateMachine View Post
It is messed up when Apple loses but working fine when they win. Got it.
Actually, It's messed up when a company leverages some IP that they have no plans of ever using in an actual product, to extort money from another firm, who has been slavishly copied on numerous occasions and can't get a judgement to save its life.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stella View Post
I'm not surprised: It is not the job of a software engineer to sift through patents to determine if they are being used in the code.
If it was we'd never finish writing any software. The problem is that people are able to patent the most vague, and trivial things, without ever having to use them, and then us programmers just do our job and solve a problem and unknowingly infringe on someone's idiotic patent.
__________________
Yo' mama's so STUPID, she went to Bangkok to get a TIE Fighter.
SPUY767 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2013, 11:55 AM   #25
envision101
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by epmatsw View Post
I'm pretty sure the idea behind a patent is that it's supposed to be for something that you couldn't trivially implement by mistake. The fact that Apple is just removing the code for it and never bothered to attempt to gain a patent on it themselves speaks to how trivial this patent is.
Actually Apple did try to obtain a patent for the related technology but failed. Microsoft also tried to patent the technology in 2004 but was denied by the USPTO because SAIC/VHC already patented the technology.

IOS users should further note that Facetime was involved in the lawsuit and a workaround needs to be applied to work around the Facetime security function. It does not involve VPNs but a secure communication link, involving encryption. Wait for the media storm on that "workaround", which involves entering usernames/passwords every 3 minutes in order to keep the session working.
envision101 is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Apple Slashes iPhone 5 Part Orders Due to Weak Demand MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 1117 Jun 12, 2013 08:14 AM
Apple Halting Mac Component Orders Due to Overestimated Demand? MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 316 Jun 8, 2013 01:59 AM
Apple Backtracks on Planned Changes to VPN On Demand Behavior on iOS Devices MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 20 Apr 28, 2013 01:15 AM
Apple Hit with $368 Million Judgment in VPN Patent Lawsuit from VirnetX MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 121 Apr 5, 2013 03:41 PM
VirnetX Files Follow-Up Patent Lawsuit Targeting Apple's Latest Products MacRumors iOS Blog Discussion 36 Nov 14, 2012 02:21 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:31 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC