Dutch Secretary of Defense threatens to 'jailbreak' nation's F-35 jet fighters — says it's just like jailbreaking an iPhone, in response to questions over software independence
It’s not as simple as it sounds, though.
Get 3DTested's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
You are now subscribed
Your newsletter sign-up was successful
Dutch Secretary of Defense Gijs Tuinman has invoked the possibility of a third party modifying the operating system of the Netherlands’ F-35 Lightning II fighters. The secretary said this during an interview with BNR Nieuwsradio, when the host asked him if the EU can make changes to the jet without approval from the United States. According to Clash Report, Tuinman said that it’s possible to do, but he refused to elaborate further.
BIG: Dutch Defence Minister Gijs Tuinman hints that software independence is possible for F-35 jets. He literally said you can “jailbreak” an F-35. When asked if Europe can modify it without US approval: “That’s not the point… we’ll see whether the Americans will show… pic.twitter.com/f11cGvtYsO February 15, 2026
“I’m going to say something I should never say, but I’ll do it anyway,” the defense secretary said. “Just like your iPhone, you can jailbreak an F-35. I won’t say more about it.”
The Trump administration has frequently been clashing with European powers in recent months, and although the U.S. Has not threatened to withhold support from the F-35, some nations are worried that their overdependence on American technology has made them vulnerable to actions from across the pond. For example, there have been rumors that the U.S. Might have embedded a kill switch on one of the most advanced fighter jets across the world, but officials deny its existence. After all, giving another nation the ability to remotely disable your weapons is unthinkable for any government.
However, the F-35 is such an advanced piece of technology that it needs a complete working supply chain to maintain its combat effectiveness. The jets require thousands of parts and services, mostly acquired from the U.S., to ensure that they remain safe to fly. More than that, they rely on Lockheed’s cloud infrastructure for software updates, logistics, and even the “Mission Data Files” that give it its threat-recognition abilities. So, even without a kill switch, the U.S. Could effectively ground any nation’s F-35 fleet if it’s excluded from this network.
This is especially worrisome for the Royal Netherlands Air and Space Force, which relies solely on the F-35 for its fighter jet needs. Because of this, it might be looking for ways to modify the software on the Lightning II, allowing it to operate even if the U.S. Cuts off the nation from the fighter’s support system.
But even though Tuinman made it look simple and even compared it to jailbreaking an iPhone, modifying an F-35 jet outside of official channels is likely easier said than done. After all, the Lightning II runs on over 8 million lines of code. Given the military nature of their application, they’re also encrypted — that means it’s not like Windows, where you can just open the Registry Editor and make changes you like. Furthermore, these flying machines are way more complicated than a single handset, and any mistakes in programming could cost millions of dollars in property damage and even the lives of highly trained Dutch pilots.
Follow 3DTested on Google News, or add us as a preferred source, to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds.
Get 3DTested's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.

-
Pierce2623 Just like an iPhone? Sure bud. I totally believe a $50,000,000 war machine can be jail broken just like an iPhone. The only difference is in this case you would have to rebuild the flight systems and weapon systems (basically ALL the electronics) from scratch because they won’t function on unsigned software.Reply -
qxp Heh - iPhone probably contains way more lines of code, Android certainly does as Linux kernel alone is way more than that (according to Wikipedia, Linux kernel had 19.5 million lines of code in 2015, likely more now).Reply
Most likely the F-35 software is small to make it easier to test and well-documented to make it more maintainable as software engineers working on it come and go. It likely has strict coding standards that prohibit fancier features from modern languages.
As for unsigned software, the trickiest bit is FPGA firmware, but worst case they would have to replace the FPGAs with fresh ones to upload their own bitstream, which is not that big of a deal compared to the cost of the plane. -
PEnns Totally wrong statement.Reply
Jailbreak an IPhone?? He surely means an Android!! 😜
On the other hand, considering the humongous amount of (soft / hardware) issues the F-35 had till (and after) it became operational, I bet it is feasible in the hands of certain competent state-hackers. -
King_V I think the point here is this:Reply
That’s not the point… we’ll see whether the Americans will show their true colors.
The fact that the question even shows up, or the concern that the US could/would betray our allies, or put this kind of restraint on them, seems like it would hurt potential sales. I can't imagine this is good, long term, for the US or for Lockheed. -
Pierce2623 Reply
The f35’s systems are indeed EXTREMELY well documented and it’s all top secret and not available to customers. Only Boeing or whoever is allowed to service them. It’s in the contracts. If they “jailbroke” them, they would be violating massive contracts and relegating themselves to much simpler Russian aircraft. However, I don’t see Russia selling to a NATO country.qxp said:Heh - iPhone probably contains way more lines of code, Android certainly does as Linux kernel alone is way more than that (according to Wikipedia, Linux kernel had 19.5 million lines of code in 2015, likely more now).
Most likely the F-35 software is small to make it easier to test and well-documented to make it more maintainable as software engineers working on it come and go. It likely has strict coding standards that prohibit fancier features from modern languages.
As for unsigned software, the trickiest bit is FPGA firmware, but worst case they would have to replace the FPGAs with fresh ones to upload their own bitstream, which is not that big of a deal compared to the cost of the plane. -
Dementoss Reply
You don't say, jeez, who expected that?:sarcastic:Admin said:Furthermore, these flying machines are way more complicated than a single handset, -
JamesJones44 Reply
In the Android world, overriding the base system is call Rooting. So he did use the correct terminology for the device he referenced.PEnns said:Jailbreak an IPhone?? He surely means an Android!! 😜 -
King_V Reply
This sort of begs two questions:Pierce2623 said:The f35’s systems are indeed EXTREMELY well documented and it’s all top secret and not available to customers. Only Boeing or whoever is allowed to service them. It’s in the contracts. If they “jailbroke” them, they would be violating massive contracts...
Other than the claim on the part of the Dutch Secretary of Defense that they COULD technically do it, if they ever did, would they tell anyone?
Do the contracts also say that the US is permitted to remote-kill the planes, either partial functionality, or in entirety?EDIT: Also, isn't it inherently dangerous for ANY government to be dependent on Lockheed's (or any private company's) cloud infrastructure to operate these devices? Seems that would allow a company the ability to say "Yeah, how about the law doesn't apply to us for situation's X, Y, and Z, just as a favor? I mean, it'd be a shame if you didn't do that for us, and you lost your air superiority, wouldn't it?"
There's clearly something that either I don't understand/know here, or it's all just something that's incredibly reckless, with any government just sort of saying "eh, we'll worry about that if it ever happens." -
qxp ReplyPierce2623 said:The f35’s systems are indeed EXTREMELY well documented and it’s all top secret and not available to customers. Only Boeing or whoever is allowed to service them. It’s in the contracts. If they “jailbroke” them, they would be violating massive contracts and relegating themselves to much simpler Russian aircraft. However, I don’t see Russia selling to a NATO country.
Being well documented and well written makes code easier to reverse engineer. I also seem to recall that the allies were provided at least some source code as it is necessary to make the most use of the aircraft.
As the article author correctly points out it is the replacement hardware that is an issue - if you don't have a supply chain to produce F35 from scratch, you will have problems servicing them.