Every modern fighter jet is basically a flying computer.
That’s not a metaphor anymore. Software now controls radar systems, targeting, navigation, communications, electronic warfare, and even how the aircraft talks to other jets and satellites. And nowhere is that more true than with the Lockheed Martin F-35.
Which is why a recent comment from Dutch defence official Gijs Tuinman caught so much attention.
During a podcast interview discussing what would happen if Europe ever had to operate the aircraft without US cooperation, he said something remarkable:
“If you still want to upgrade despite everything, I’m going to say something I should never say, but I will anyway: you can jailbreak an F-35 just like an iPhone.“
He didn’t explain further. But the statement raises a fascinating question — not about hacking jets, but about control.
Why the F-35 is Different From Previous Aircraft
Historically, countries bought fighter jets and maintained them themselves. The F-35 changes that relationship.
The aircraft is deeply dependent on software updates and diagnostic systems managed through Lockheed Martin infrastructure. Updates are distributed through the Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS), which handles maintenance data, technical records, and periodic software upgrades delivered as large service-pack-style releases.
In other words, the jet doesn’t just belong to the country flying it. It also relies on the company and ecosystem supporting it.
Tuinman framed the aircraft as a cooperative international product. Parts come from multiple countries — for example, the UK produces the Rolls-Royce engine components — and the program itself was designed around shared development. His comment appears to suggest European operators may still have technical capability to service or modify the aircraft’s software if necessary.
Not everyone interprets that literally as “hacking.” Security researcher Ken Munro noted that military hardware is fundamentally different from consumer electronics. Researchers can freely analyze smartphones because they can purchase them. Fighter jets are inaccessible.
“Unlike consumer devices, such as the iPhone, which is easily accessed by the research community, and therefore subject to their ‘attention,’ one can’t go buy an F-35 on eBay,” he said.
Because of that, vulnerabilities are harder to independently discover — but also harder to publicly demonstrate.
The Real Issue: Software Sovereignty
The controversy isn’t really about someone plugging a laptop into a jet and rewriting its code.
It’s about dependence.
Modern weapons systems are software platforms. Updates matter. Bug fixes matter. New threat libraries matter. If a country cannot update the software, capability can degrade over time even if the aircraft itself is physically intact.
There have already been political anxieties in Europe about whether the United States could restrict support or updates in a geopolitical dispute. Some officials have even publicly raised fears about a theoretical remote disable function, though no confirmed evidence has been presented.
Israel negotiated special permission to run its own software on its F-35I fleet, which shows customization is technically possible under specific agreements.
That’s what Tuinman’s “jailbreak” analogy likely points to. Not cracking encryption for fun, but the ability to operate, maintain, and potentially adapt a platform independently of the original manufacturer.
The iPhone comparison actually makes sense in one narrow way. A jailbroken phone isn’t faster or physically different — it simply removes manufacturer restrictions and lets the owner control the software environment.
The F-35 debate is essentially the same argument, just scaled up to a trillion-dollar military program.
No one is realistically expecting hobbyists to reverse-engineer a stealth fighter. The barriers are enormous, access is restricted, and the systems are far more complex than consumer devices.
But the comment highlights a new reality of modern defense technology.
The most important part of a fighter jet may no longer be the airframe, the engine, or even the stealth coating.
It’s the software — and who ultimately controls it.
