Got a tip for us? Share it...

New in OS X: Get MacRumors Push Notifications on your Mac

Resubscribe Now Close

Apple Backtracks on Planned Changes to VPN On Demand Behavior on iOS Devices

Earlier this month, we reported that Apple had announced upcoming changes to the behavior of VPN On Demand for devices running iOS 6.1 or later. The changes, which were planned to be deployed in a software update later this month, were necessitated by a $368 million judgment against Apple in a patent lawsuit brought by VirnetX.

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.

vpn_settings_on_ios
Apple's changes to the feature were to see the removal of the "Always" configuration option for VPN On Demand, with the behavior defaulting back to an "Establish if needed" option. That option does not, however, perform ideally under certain circumstances, leading Apple to suggest that users may need to resort to turning VPN On Demand on and off manually, a potentially significant inconvenience.

The patent judgment covered previous infringement by Apple but did not address future use of VirnetX's intellectual property, and it seems that Apple had decided to simply remove the "Always" feature from iOS rather than agree to an additional licensing deal with VirnetX.

But it now appears that the two sides may have reached an agreement, as Apple on Wednesday updated its support document on the issue to note that it no longer plans to make the previously announced change.
Apple no longer plans to change the behavior of the VPN On Demand feature of iOS 6.1 for devices that have already been shipped. The "Always" option will continue to work as it currently does on these devices.
It is, however, currently unclear why Apple specifically mentions that it will not be changing the VPN ON Demand feature on "devices that have already been shipped", leaving open the possibility that it may make changes to devices that have yet to ship.

Apple's proposed changes had brought significant scrutiny from the enterprise-focused security community, with security firm Mobile Active Defense having released a detailed whitepaper (PDF) highlighting numerous issues with Apple's proposed changes.

(Thanks, Jorge!)

Update: Computerworld notes that in its 10-Q regulatory filing earlier this week, Apple reported that it is continuing to challenge the $368 million judgment in VirnetX's favor. The move suggests that Apple may simply be delaying making any changes to VPN On Demand until the case has run its course rather than the two companies having reached a licensing agreement.

Top Rated Comments

(View all)

18 months ago

No-one is interested.. few minutes, and not a single comment.


I’ll hazard a guess that the only people interested in this, are currently making money, not browsing MacRumors ;)
Rating: 7 Votes
18 months ago
Somebody somewhere just got a load of cash...
Rating: 3 Votes
18 months ago
I wonder if this was a bluff on Apple's part to get them to drop the licensing fees. As in,
:apple: "Fine we'll take it off entirely, and you won't get a dime from now on"
VirnetX: "No way you'll do that"
:apple:**insert 6.1 release notes**
VirnetX: "Ok ok, we'll drop the price."

**Tim Cook sips his Mai Tai**
Rating: 2 Votes
18 months ago
Uhhh... What?
Rating: 2 Votes
18 months ago
"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."

Comment from the lawyer representing VirnetX. To me, that just seems to be acknowledging Apple didn't copy VirnetX, they just unwittingly ran into a 'roadblock' patent. While that makes no difference to the lawsuit, it does highlight that patents are just being given out too easily - including to Apple.
Rating: 2 Votes
18 months ago

How do you setup the "Always" on cause I've always had to manually turn my VPN Manually ON... dont have to manually turn off it turns off all by itself... as soon as screen goes to sleep it disconnects which drives me crazy...


This...

Where is the "Always" setting?
Rating: 2 Votes
18 months ago

"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."

Comment from the lawyer representing VirnetX. To me, that just seems to be acknowledging Apple didn't copy VirnetX, they just unwittingly ran into a 'roadblock' patent. While that makes no difference to the lawsuit, it does highlight that patents are just being given out too easily - including to Apple.


I think developers are instructed not to look at patents because if you know about them then any infringement can be found to be willful and the judgement against you will be larger.

Anytime I have looked at a patent is has left me more confused than informed so I'm pretty sure the whole system is failing at at least half its purpose.
Rating: 2 Votes
18 months ago
How do you setup the "Always" on cause I've always had to manually turn my VPN Manually ON... dont have to manually turn off it turns off all by itself... as soon as screen goes to sleep it disconnects which drives me crazy...
Rating: 1 Votes
18 months ago

I think developers are instructed not to look at patents because if you know about them then any infringement can be found to be willful and the judgement against you will be larger.

And it wastes a fantastic amount of time to try to look up patents for every little thing you add, especially when practically any line of code these days is potentially something that's been patented judging by a lot of the recent cases.

If you have to stop every five seconds to look up whether a particular usage of a socket, for loop or increment has been patented, then it just plain stops developers from doing what they're supposed to be doing; developing. This is why big companies have legal teams to look for possible conflicts, but then they don't necessarily know enough about the specifics to be able to find exact matches anyway; there are a lot of patents out there, and nearly all of them are worded in incredibly unhelpful language that makes the concept as vague as possible to all involved in the hopes of it being applicable to something only loosely related for maximum profit from zero actual development work.


Sorry, I just really hate the stupidity in patents, and yet nothing is being done to actually fix the damn things.
Rating: 1 Votes
18 months ago

The "already shipped" comment isn't so hard to understand. Apple has now paid for all past infringing devices, so those devices are licensed to use the software as is.

Whether they will pay a license for new devices is still not known.



NOT TRUE...Apple hasn't paid a dime yet and is still infringing without a license. The Products that came after this lawsuit are part of a second suit that has yet to come to trial. It is likely that if they reach an agreement it will be for everything and the second suit will be dropped.

----------

I wonder if this was a bluff on Apple's part to get them to drop the licensing fees. As in,
:apple: "Fine we'll take it off entirely, and you won't get a dime from now on"
VirnetX: "No way you'll do that"
:apple:**insert 6.1 release notes**
VirnetX: "Ok ok, we'll drop the price."

**Tim Cook sips his Mai Tai**


That is one wishful thinking way to be thinking about it. More like this:

Apple: Well, we steal we don't pay
Court: You must pay
VirnetX: This is our rate
Apple: No way. We will just come up with a workaround!
VirnetX: Good luck with that.
Users: Hey Apple, WTF is going on with VPN???
User: Hey WTF is up with iMessage and FaceTime??? They keep going down!
Apple: Uh..how much do we need to pay again?

While Tim Cook reads rumors of big investors asking for him to be replaced
Rating: 1 Votes

[ Read All Comments ]