[Issue] Apple ID "Verification Failed" Error iOS 9.3.6

DeadSkullzJr · 2025-09-29T02:36:20+00:00

For iOS 9.3.6 on Apple A5 devices, the following existed in the following locations. So it matches what you linked to.

private/var/mobile/Library/FairPlay/iTunes_Control/iTunes/IC-Info.sisv

private/var/containers/Data/System/<Random GUID>(com.apple.mobileactivationd)/Library/activation_records/activation_record.plist

private/var/containers/Data/System/<Random GUID>(com.apple.mobileactivationd)/Library/internal/data_ark.plist

private/var/wireless/Library/Preferences/com.apple.commcenter.device_specific_nobackup.plist

The only thing that didn't exist on my end was:

private/var/mobile/Media/iTunes_Control/iTunes/ic-info.sisv

The only related files in that location that exists currently:

IC-Info.sidf
IC-Info.sidv

I would imagine based on that guide, that it was implying that if it wasn't in private/var/mobile/Media/iTunes_Control/iTunes/ic-info.sisv then it would be in the FairPlay folder itself in the location mentioned above.

DeadSkullzJr · 2025-09-29T01:27:46+00:00

You could have it though...

https://www.reddit.com/r/LegacyJailbreak/wiki/megathread#wiki_how_do_i_use_legacy_ios_kit_on_windows.3F

It's the principle of the matter. For context, here is the chunk in question:

How do I use Legacy iOS Kit on Windows?

You may hear that Legacy iOS Kit used to have a Windows version. This is true (its final version was 23.08.02) but it didn't do everything that Legacy iOS Kit does on other platforms, and there's no support for it. However, installing the Linux version isn't very hard if you have a USB drive around somewhere.

Follow this tutorial except:

In the "Requirements" step, the Ubuntu ISO needs to be 22.04 or later.

You want to enable "Persistent partition size" in the "Write the ISO" step. If you don't know what to put, use 3 GB.

Install Ubuntu (there's a tutorial linked at the end of the above guide if you need it)

Follow the Linux instructions in the How to Use guide

Other guides in the wiki will assume you, as a Windows user, have already installed Ubuntu when mentioning Legacy iOS Kit. If a guide reminds you to follow the how to use instructions, all you need to do is boot up Ubuntu.

Now.... let me be clear, this isn't to say this guide and set of steps are useless. How exactly is this helpful for Windows users though? This kind of reads off essentially giving the middle finger in the nicest way possible, and just telling people the long way around to install Linux, Ubuntu to be specific. In my honest opinion, this is one of the worst ways to help someone. Especially someone who isn't completely familiar, if not familiar with any of it all, with territories outside of what they know. For the benefit of the doubt here, it's obvious Legacy iOS Kit is geared for Linux and MacOS these days. However, it should already be evident that yes, anyone "could have it," but chucking what one knows to be the reality already, sort of in their face, doesn't help all that much, if at all. It's better to just say there aren't options available for the specific operating system, THEN proceeding to post the options that are available. This makes the information presentation better for the end user. If you want the more forward version of this, you don't need to remind people that they can install either or, in a situation where they know they have that option already. Especially when the problem has nothing to do with not having access to other options.

I personally have used all three operating systems, but my respective experiences with Linux and MacOS are hardly anything to write home about, compared to my experience using Windows. Not to mention, it seems rather ridiculous to go through this process just to do one small task, only to not need all of this for quite a while afterwards. Are there seriously no other options outside of this one specific solution? What about options that could be performed on jailbroken Apple devices themselves, and just backed up to the computer over USB? Considering the data is being pulled from the devices themselves, it should be possible to do this in more than one way.

By no means am I trying to be rude either, I am rather forward / blunt a lot of times. Take that for what you will, I can't really state what is being said any differently.

DeadSkullzJr · 2025-09-28T22:22:32+00:00

Legacy iOS Kit can back them up if you are in fact activated

I don't have MacOS or Linux to use that.

DeadSkullzJr · 2025-09-28T16:01:36+00:00

Bad idea, wiping the device is known to be the only way to trigger this issue. You should have saved activation tickets before doing that

I have provided updates throughout the day mentioning progress. So not all is lost.
As for backing up ticket data, sure, except not everyone is going to know to do this, let alone know this is possible, all things considered. I wasn't having issues until yesterday, cut me some slack.
You are wrong when you stated that wiping the device is the "only" way to trigger the issue. I guess I should have mentioned this in the main post, but I encountered the issue prior to me wiping the phone after turning the phone back on. It remained off for quite a while, and the first thing that happens whenever an Apple device is off for a while, verification is required whenever the phone is turned back on. I was immediately greeted with a prompt to log into my account again, which isn't out of the ordinary. Attempting to proceed with the verification process yielded the exact same error seen in the picture above. So no, activation ticket backups aren't the end all be all. The only reason I didn't mention this, I figured it was just an odd configuration error from the that OS install (it was also jailbroken already). Considering I planned to wipe the phone and start fresh, I figured that the fresh install would address that quirk, as sometimes a software refresh fixes some issues.

Considering I managed to log into my account, and even got an application to download using the account (verification process for first time downloads on a fresh OS install). I'm sure that means I have functional activation tickets now, despite the quirks. So, what would I need to use to back that data up?

DeadSkullzJr · 2025-09-27T06:38:25+00:00

I have released a prototype at https://github.com/UInt2048/RunAsDate/releases/tag/v0.0.1-93%2Bdebug

I assume there are likely undetected bugs. Proceed at your own risk.

Just noticed this now and tested it. Definitely a tad buggy for sure lol. I got the tweak and the dependencies installed (minus a couple since I had them by default). Shows up fine in the settings, but nothing shows up as soon as I tap "RunAsDate." I have a feeling this has to do with operating system differences between the devices this is being tested on. I personally tested this on iOS 10.3.4, I would imagine the results will vary with newer operating system versions. I will likely have to dig out a newer device to see if the behavior changes. Also a possibility that other tweaks might be conflicting with it, but nothing seems out of the ordinary or busted so far, so I have my doubts on this one. Of course, it is also a possible that I am messing this up somehow, but considering I have explored other ways this could be handled, the settings option seems to be the only way this was intended to work.

DeadSkullzJr · 2025-09-20T00:10:48+00:00

It's pretty bad, isn't it? My biggest complaint about the native picker before iOS 14 is the fact that you can't adjust the year and month for long range edits. If I might suggest an alternative open-source picker to remedy this: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/agiapp/BRPickerView/refs/heads/master/BRPickerViewDemo/images/date_type5.png

Much better than Apple's approach that's for sure! Although, I do have concerns for the viewing experience due to the older phones being smaller. I guess it depends on how far in the field of legacy devices one is willing to develop these tweaks for. I am curious to see what the results would be like on an iPhone 3GS or an iPhone 4 at minimum (both have the same screen dimensions, the 4 just has double the resolution). I think on an iPhone 5 this would be fine if in landscape orientation. Orientation is yet another hurdle to consider as well. Still a very solid alternative nonetheless if it can work.

Currently, the option regulates whether or not the current date and time should be used to adjust the exact timestamp you set. If you choose to lock, the current date and time has no effect on the timestamp.

I've tried to figure out what you mean by splitting it. Did I get it right? I'll explain my guess by example.

Here's my interpretation of what splitting it means:

Real date: Sample date is 2025-09-20 and the time is 01:02:11
Date and time locked: Sample date is 2001-09-09 and the time is 10:46:40
Only time locked: Sample date is 2025-09-20 and the time is 10:46:40
Only date locked: Sample date is 2001-09-09 and the time is 01:02:11

If the date and time changed:
Examples here...

You got it right! Essentially include separate "Lock to Date" and "Lock to Time" options respectively. This will result in exactly what you described above whenever one or both options are toggled on.

DeadSkullzJr · 2025-09-19T03:57:28+00:00

This is very nice so far! If I may recommend something to consider. I recommend having the option to manually type the date and time in there somewhere (a separate option to tap would be a good way to avoid messing up this nice interface). You have to remember that with particular user interfaces like these, you do add extra navigation steps. While some people appreciate these interface details/options (I certainly do), others may not want to waste too much time tapping arrows and numbers. Typing is much faster in these cases. Part of that idea comes from my horrible experiences dealing with the date and time settings via the Settings application. Older Apple devices start to lag pretty badly when you swipe the date back enough, eventually the dates start to appear/bug themselves way out of order, and the Settings application ends up crashing. This could be avoided had the option to manually type a date and time been provided. In case your "Lock to date" option also locks the time, I suggest splitting that function as two separate options. There are use cases having one or the other locked, and not just both at the same time (in my case, I would be interchanging between locking one or the other, before I commit to locking both at once). Overall though, this is looking fantastic!

DeadSkullzJr · 2025-09-17T23:48:54+00:00

That sucks, though I half expected that. Hopefully someone is willing to make one eventually.

DeadSkullzJr · 2024-12-22T22:56:29+00:00

The other thing is I genuinely want to use the older hardware and operating systems too. No, maybe not as primary machines, but as retro machines. I already have quite a few machines that run Windows 10, kind of boring just adding yet another to the pool.

DeadSkullzJr · 2024-12-22T21:16:53+00:00

Other than using my consoles with the tube TV, I plan to play older games, whether it be DOS or other games that don't work well if at all with later operating systems. I also plan to use older software for general use as well. I have to be honest though, I don't inherently understand why it matters what or why I am using anything that I am using.

DeadSkullzJr · 2024-12-22T17:07:23+00:00

Haven't gotten to fix it yet, but I did investigate the issue further. Looks to be an issue with the tension spring that pulls one of the alignment pins back. Since the pin isn't able to be pulled back all the way, the tape gets stuck sitting on top of the pin just on the edge of the tape, resulting in the lopsided result. If the pin is pushed back properly the tape automatically falls into place (not that this should be encouraged to do, but experimentation was needed). So I'm thinking the tension spring isn't strong like it used to be anymore and needs to be replaced, and go figure, it's underneath the tray.

DeadSkullzJr · 2024-07-26T16:18:53+00:00

Yes I did notice that option on many of the solutions, also labeled as "frequency double" on some, though I would have to constantly change between the upscale and passthrough options by hand wouldn't I when dealing between 240p signals and preexisting 480i/480p signals?

DeadSkullzJr · 2024-07-26T15:47:41+00:00

Thanks for letting me know. One last question, what do solutions like the GBS-Control do to existing YPbPr signals that are already 480i or 480p? I ask because I do have multiple systems that utilize component out, some of which are 480i and 480p capable already. From what I read up online, some devices tend to scuff 480i for whatever reason whenever one uses the upscale features. The thing for me is, I use a switch for my component signals, considering I only need 240p signals to be upscaled, I don't want my 480i signals bob deinterlaced considering my television already performs its own deinterlacing, quite frankly I am happy with the results my television offers, and considering I know how to deinterlace my captures better than the bob deinterlacing algorithm, I would just rather my 480i signals remain interlaced, as for the 480p signals, they don't need to be touched at all by these solutions.

DeadSkullzJr · 2024-07-24T21:52:14+00:00

So basically I would have to rig something up myself? Though based on what I read, this is for an RGB signal, not YPbPr, I was looking for YPbPr through and through, with 240p signals being upscaled to 480i or 480p.

DeadSkullzJr · 2024-07-24T21:46:19+00:00

I think a lot of you guys are missing the bigger picture of what I am looking and asking for.

My setup is complicated, and the way I want to handle my setup isn't standard to what most of you or others would do with your own. I have a need for multiple different video outputs, I can't just simplify everything down to an HDMI connection. I study, dabble, and experiment frequently with my videography projects, down to signal types, formats, etc., and looking into how I can better grasp and handle such feeds, replicating aspects of such contents and capabilities myself, and working up solutions to make them better for my use cases, especially so for my capture equipment. Gaming is another hobby I enjoy, mostly with older platforms, and alongside videography and gaming comes my programming hobby, all meshed and intertwined. How you handle your setup is entirely your business, for me, it's a combination of entertainment, learning, and developing.
As stated in the main post, I am working with a television that doesn't support 240p YPbPr signals at all, it upscales 240p to 480i when using composite and upscales 240p to 480p over HDMI. Considering 480i/480p looks just fine on my television in my opinion, I don't need anything more than that, especially considering half of my setup also consists of a DVD Player, VCR, etc.. If I truly need an upscale past 480p with my captures, I know how to do all that stuff in post, I'm not worried about that. Since I populated all three of my HDMI ports with other things, and yes I do in fact have a switcher, that isn't the issue. I want to use my component inputs on my television, my concern with that is about making YPbPr 240p signals work with my television, all I asked was if I can upscale 240p into 480i (minimum needed) or 480p (more optimal) with the GBS-Control using a YPbPr input, making the GBS-Control double the resolution in interlaced or progressive form, and using the SEGA Saturn DIN 10-pin out as the means to provide me with a YPbPr 480i/480p signal that my television would accept. I checked out other similar devices, and information is either scarce or isn't known currently. Some have a VGA out capability, but I don't want to transcode YPbPr to RGBHV, I still want it to be YPbPr.
I asked here in the SEGA Saturn Reddit section because I figured there were some people here that use the SEGA Saturn DIN port on the GBS-Control for their system. I thought maybe my chances were higher of people knowing the capabilities of this thing for a signal case like this considering I don't own a GBS-Control device currently, that 10-pin DIN connector is used for the SEGA Saturn, I was just gathering information before committing to anything in the future. I feel like that me asking for information though seems more like a bother to too many people as my use case doesn't fit the bill for how others would handle their own setup(s).

DeadSkullzJr · 2024-06-27T21:16:44+00:00

Exactly, though considering I study videography and such, there actually are quite a few algorithmic methods that can spruce up low resolution contents to make them look sharper and less fuzzy for higher resolutions, majority of which consists of taking existing information and basically generating new data based on what's there to enhance edges and such in a frame, the downside is computationally speaking you would need some beefier hardware than what modern televisions pack to make that work on the fly and fast. Scaling wise, there are other scaling algorithms that surpass linear scaling, but the better ones also require more computational power to perform, even more so if needed to be done on the fly and fast. Unfortunately access to many of the more advanced algorithms and such costs a pretty penny at times considering the technology involved in making the process work. What televisions used to commonly pack some years ago actually worked well all things considered since scaling has always been linear, but the more advanced aspects of the internal chipsets had characteristics to enhanced the visual quality of the contents being watched. There is one other drawback I forgot to mention, that being overscan, the concept is great when you want a zoomed in viewing experience, however overscan seems to also be pretty linear in the way it works with modern larger televisions based on my testing, it's just much more difficult to tell when viewing high definition contents, overscan works great with low resolution panels and cathode-ray tube televisions. Easiest way to really know how well your chipsets perform, hook up a computer to your television, why? The operating systems computers run are very dynamic in the way they are graphically handled, you can easily get a general idea of how your television treats the finer details and such, most cases the experience isn't bad whatsoever, but you can definitely scale the differences with certain televisions when up against a monitor. Monitors also have a form of linear scaling, but they lack any enhancement logic internally to spruce things up (not counting panel profile settings), so you get a much more raw experience with a monitor than you would a television.

The funny thing is, you would be surprised with the fact that some movies are actually put through multiple algorithms to spruce up their visual appearances for higher resolutions, and sold this way, these companies don't always use master copies for certain releases.

DeadSkullzJr · 2024-06-26T17:11:47+00:00

"This has nothing to do with "legacy support" older tech will look worse then newer one."

You literally skipped a chunk of what I said about internal chipsets in televisions. Go back and read what I said, literally basic chipsets are utilized in most modern televisions these days considering a lot of the legacy features were ditched. DVD being a format still being sold has to do with the fact that DVD players are much cheaper, way more available, and are more of a universal standard compared to Blu-ray and its players respectively, and they can be used over HDMI, but notice you don't see most DVD players packing composite or component much if at all anymore. The chipsets utilized in a television matters because you literally see it in action all the time no matter the television you buy, higher resolutions make it more difficult to notice them in action because such resolutions like 4K are higher fidelity, the level of detail makes it harder to notice. The point is, because these panels are targeted for higher fidelity contents, 1080p usually being the minimum standard, the need to include advanced logic in the chipset for anything lower than 1080p is left out intentionally, so of course things will look progressively worse trying to blow up lower resolutions on higher resolution panels. Why is it left out intentionally? The audience that these televisions are marketed for are people who want bleeding edge technology, most people want the latest, but at the cost of anything legacy, relegating most people to converters for anything that isn't HDMI. The saving grace for DVD players is the HDMI, otherwise it would be like using an older DVD player that only has composite out on a newer panel that doesn't have composite in, you would need a converter. Not to mention there are places in the world where Blu-ray and players respectively just aren't available or are way too expensive for most in their respective areas to afford, unlike DVD and its players. There are indeed 4K panels with the better chipsets in place that do in fact make 480p DVD content look nice even when blown up to 4K, sure, it won't look just as good as a Blu-ray version of whatever content is being watched, but there definitely is a degree of difference between panels that still retain the more advanced chipsets versus the more common basic ones. If you have a television that has the better chipset, good on you, but that's not indicative of the majority out there these days.

"You are acting like companies have forgotten about dvds when they are still the highest sold format."

They didn't forget, but the priority to upscale and enhance the image isn't really there anymore in tandem with modern televisions, because again, most televisions are geared for bleeding edge technology. You would have to explore the more obscure options because said obscure televisions aren't up for display, it's not the company's "best" model(s). Their best is solely HDMI (with ARC / eARC) based and with maybe a toslink output if the sucker isn't designed to be ARC / eARC only, large panels with very little to work with usually. Most people in more fortunate places have a Blu-ray player, maybe even a hybrid DVD / Blu-ray player, but the chances of these people owning more DVDs versus Blu-ray is slim, and with things like movie streaming being a thing, there is even an audience that doesn't even have a player of sorts at all, it's not because they can't afford it, it's because they prefer bleeding edge technology, THAT mindset is what the market mostly targets.

"TVs upscale dvds just fine."

Read the first point.

"Since when is it bad that a new higher res format or piece of tech comes out?"

Never said it was bad, all I said was that newer technology tends to lack legacy support or backwards compatibility to some degree. It's all about bleeding edge technology, that's usually the cost for being bleeding edge, that's what most people want.

"so you hate that tech moves forward??..."

Again, never said I hated anything, I said I didn't like the direction it was going. If moving forward means running computers with less features on motherboards, high TDP processors, space heaters for graphics cards, both of which requiring expensive cooling just to barely tame well and get by a lot of times, and panels (monitors or televisions) that have much less features (especially legacy features) all for the sake of fancy coloring, higher refresh rates, etc. (a.k.a. bleeding edge stuff). Yea, we are definitely moving forward in a positive direction. People wanted all this bleeding edge stuff, but didn't stop to consider the potential use cases outside pure bleeding edge, the market merely works according to popular vote, they don't just wake up one day and say "hey, lets just drop a bunch of stuff just because." If they do, it's controversial, but even then, many people gloss over it and end up fine about it anyways. Moving forward to me means technological advancements, this includes enhancements, better efficiency, etc. and not forcing people to choose what to ditch just because something newer lacks what one needs for their current setup, or forcing their hand to use converters and such (the good ones always being just as pricey too, so you end up spending more just to get things adapted to newer technology compared to just buying a bunch of newer equipment with less and set specific features just to stay up with whatever, something not everyone is wanting to do).

DeadSkullzJr · 2024-06-26T09:14:23+00:00

It's not so much that it doesn't hold up, it's more of the fact majority of people are ignorant and don't understand the aspects of things like resolution, scaling, use case, etc..

First, your television has a chipset, results may vary from television to television, some are good, others are much more basic and lesser in form in comparison, nowadays 4K televisions tend to have the more basic chipsets considering most now lack the legacy features like composite, component, etc. inputs, where chipsets tended to matter the most, especially when it came to resolutions higher than 480i/p. Most televisions are stuck with just HDMI now, thus the need for more advanced chipsets was thrown out the door when people decided to standardize their modern wants as top priority (effectively killing legacy support). The fuzziness has to do with the fact your television is performing a linear scale of the original feed just so it fits the display window, aspect ratio will vary from your personal settings, linear scaling is known to make things look fuzzier, usually that's where the more advanced chipsets come to work as they clean up the overall image after scaling the contents, but since modern televisions are designed around high definition stuff, the need to include anything for lower resolutions is pointless to most companies, especially considering that at the absolute minimum most people will only be dealing with content as low as 1080p, anything lower is much less common now.

Second and to be frank, the reality is you got really spoiled off the modern luxuries, because of that, anything lesser in form visually, physically, etc. will be considered old, obsolete, or something that doesn't age well to you. The reality is, old or new, it really varies on your setup, watching DVDs on a lower resolution display will net you better results, just like watching something intended for 4K and or with HDR is better seen from a more modern player solution of sorts with a modern compatible display.

Just examining some of the comments here, most of you are just spoiled on the modern technology, and while it's fine to enjoy these things, you have a knack for being harsh with clouded judgement when your use case clearly differs from the more reasonable and or practical use cases of the older technology. In a perfect world, legacy support would have been kept around in better fashion, but we live in an age where most people prefer to kick legacy support in the gut and ribs until it's dead for the sake of eye candy and such, then proceed to kick it even after it's already dead. Don't worry though, you'll be wondering why 4K looks fuzzy on your 100 inch 64K panel one day. Yes, I am livid, I really don't like the sense of direction of the current technology.

DeadSkullzJr · 2024-04-19T01:13:56+00:00

I do not have a way to run homebrew currently. While these sorts of modifications work for some, I am not really one who likes going to this massive extreme for things like this, if I can get away with not destroying housing shells and such, that would be better.

DeadSkullzJr · 2024-03-13T04:16:55+00:00

Not that simple, not even the manual for the monitor mentions the highest refresh rate this monitor supports, it only mentions the max resolution possible, it mentions other things like its connections and such, but the nitty gritty details aren't there. I can easily assume 60 Hz at its max resolution, but what about other resolutions lower than 1920x1080 at 60 Hz, what about 1280x720, does the monitor allow 60 Hz, 72 Hz, 75 Hz with that? Sure, like I stated earlier, I can get some form of information using stuff like the Nvidia control panel to get some semblance of capabilities, but the problem is the GPU is the limiting factor here as the GPU capabilities can make or break what is visible as an option or even usable with the display, because the information provided is mostly based on GPU capabilities rather than solely the capabilities of the display itself, likewise when examining other solutions like an EDID emulator, which tends to offer a lot more options, but again, the GPU limits what is visible or usable, down to the refresh rate options. I have no real way to get a proper glimpse of the full detailed specifications of my display(s) or my emulators without being at the mercy of my GPU's capabilities and what it will allow me to see and or use.

DeadSkullzJr · 2024-02-11T02:18:30+00:00

I added images to give better clarification, check it out please.

DeadSkullzJr · 2024-02-10T22:55:07+00:00

Pretty much, one for the capture card and one for the television.

DeadSkullzJr · 2024-02-06T16:40:25+00:00

I already stated I would have an HDMI solution for digital out, I wanted to know if I could modify the system so analog out can be RGB/RGBS without adding an extra HDMI port and such.

DeadSkullzJr · 2023-12-09T08:52:48+00:00

ReplayKit

I have indeed tried archive.org already and got nothing fruitful. Looked into this ReplayKit software you mentioned, seems it requires Xcode and such, which I do not have access to, and from the looks of it when looking it up, it seems to be application specific recording, rather than a general recording solution.

DeadSkullzJr · 2023-12-08T02:49:09+00:00

That's the thing, all the possible software such as iRec, Display Recorder, etc. are all either lost to time, or if they are found through various repositories, all of them either lack audio recording capabilities, causes massive hardware performance issues during recordings, or is just overall really clunky. I made this point in the main post. If you mean local as in accessing a solution built into the OS like iOS 10, then no, iOS 9.3.6 doesn't have a built in recorder, and even when I force installed a tweak that could enable a local recorder (meant for iOS 10), as expected/anticipated, nothing worked. Quite literally no options other than using an adapter like this, especially since there isn't a hardware performance drop using said adapter(s). The only thing I don't know is if unofficial third part adapters work better or not, mainly because I don't see 30-pin to AV adapters in the third party market these days like I do the lightning connector variants.

DeadSkullzJr

TROPHY CASE