In light of a recent Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC) tablet story, I thought it was worth discussing exactly how these jailbroke tablets made their way in.
As a quick refresher, A jailbroken tablet is a prison-issued device that’s been modified to remove or bypass its restrictions.
Normally, MDOC (and other corrections systems) lock down tablets so that incarcerated people can only use them for approved functions: things like monitored email messaging, music purchased through vendors like JPay, or limited educational tools. Internet access, outside apps, and free communication are blocked.
However, when a tablet is jailbroken, the limits are lifted. If someone has tampered with its software, individuals can:
- Bypass restrictions (e.g., accessing the internet without monitoring).
- Install unapproved apps for messaging, social media, or even games.
- Hide unauthorized files or communication tools.
In Michigan, the jailbreak process often happened when a tablet was reported as “broken,” sent home for “repair,” modified outside, and then smuggled back in. Once inside, it looked normal, but the software was altered.
In short: a jailbroken tablet is one that’s been hacked to work like a regular consumer device instead of a locked prison tablet, giving access that the standard system doesn’t allow.
When MDOC first rolled out tablet devices to incarcerated individuals, it was sold as a win: controlled access to email, education, music, and other limited content. The promise was digital inclusion behind bars.
But give people a will, a way, and enough time, and there’s always a way to exploit a system.
How Jailbreaking Used to Work
For years, the MDOC tablet program was exploited through a fairly straightforward but illicit pipeline:
- Report a “broken” tablet
Incarcerated individuals could claim their tablet was broken and have it sent home with a loved one for repair. In many cases, it didn’t even have to be their actual tablet. - Repair + Jailbreak
Once out of the facility, the tablet could be altered — the software cracked so that restrictions were lifted. Unauthorized apps or connectivity features could be added (e.g. contraband Wi-Fi sticks), granting unmonitored access. - Smuggle it back in
A key vulnerability was a compromised property officer or local vendor — someone willing to sneak the “repaired” device back into the prison system. The tablet would then re-enter circulation appearing functional, but with the hidden capabilities.
This wasn’t just about streaming movies or games. As the Corrections1 article alleges, the altered tablets were sometimes used for criminal enterprise activity, unmonitored communication, and broader security risks.
True crime fans can certainly attest to the unmonitored communication aspect, as FOIA requests found one individual with eight (8) jailbroke tablets and a wifi stick.
Policy Update: MDOC Cracks Down
The Corrections1 piece notes that MDOC recently reevaluated its tablet policy after discovering individuals had rigged 5% of the roughly 24,000 in circulation to bypass restrictions, access unauthorized internet, or run unapproved apps.
Key changes announced include:
- Tightened purchase and delivery controls
The approval and verification process has been tweaked to introduce delays between when a resident loses a tablet and when they can replace it. - Redefining contraband
As of June 23, altered electronic tablets or devices manipulated for unmonitored communication are explicitly added to contraband lists. - Registration & tracking enhancements
Facility-level registration and tracking are to be improved to increase accountability when tablets move through the system.
These reforms aim to close the loopholes that allowed jailbreaks and illicit use.
The Risks and Impacts
The Corrections1 article further explains how these compromised tablets posed multiple risks:
- Officer safety and assaults
Guards confiscating jailbroken tablets have reportedly faced violent resistance from individuals trying to protect their illicit access. - Unmonitored communication
Some devices were being used to communicate with gang members, coordinate illicit activity, or bypass surveillance. - Underestimation of the problem
While MDOC estimated ~5% of tablets were compromised, union reps believe the true figure is likely much higher.
While some people may have had benign usage, others took advantage of it; using their tablets to send harassing and nasty messages to people in the outside world.
The Shift From Smuggling to Centralized Control
The smuggling loop — broken devices sent home, jailbroken, and smuggled back — has now intersected with documented policy changes. The new MDOC rules are an alleged attempt to dismantle that pipeline by removing the “send-home repair” step and putting stronger vendor-controlled systems in its place.
But they’re missing a key, crucial piece. The same piece that MDOC always misses in all of its policies: their staff.
It intentionally ignores the fact that staff are a crucial part of the jailbreak tablet schemes, and ignores addressing that element. It begs the question: why aren’t there already mechanisms in place to prevent this in property rooms across Michigan?
Unfortunately, all it takes is a handful of people to ruin it for everyone, because those changes raise serious questions:
- Who pays for repairs?
Under the new model, families are often forced through the vendor (JPay) and charged a fee. When a tablet breaks under standard conditions, this becomes a burden. - Is the system more secure, or just more closed?
The reforms place more authority in vendor hands, potentially trading transparency for control. - Where is the Staff accountability?
The piece forcing accountability for corrections staff, is, as always, elusive. No reports, no mechanisms to prevent it, just a quiet cover-up of their involvement in funneling in contraband.
Lessons & Questions for Justice Advocates
Unfortunately, it’s an issue that MDOC should have seen coming.
- Loopholes, unfortunately, will be exploited
When systems restrict access severely, workarounds emerge. The jailbreak pipeline wasn’t an isolated failure; it was a predictable consequence. The only people who appear to be punished through any of this, are the families. Not the staff complicit in the scheme. - Tech control isn’t a substitute for justice
Cracking down on hardware doesn’t address broader interests: access to communication, accountability, and dignity. - Vendor monopolies matter
Control over repair, access fees, and oversight all lie with vendors like JPay. That centralization needs scrutiny. - Reform must come with transparency
Any future changes should be transparent, publicly scrutinized, and designed to benefit residents, not just institutional control. Michigan DOC owes tax payers an explanation; yet another reason for a dedicated Ombudsman.
Pulling It Together
MDOC’s tablet program began with promise; but its vulnerabilities exposed how fragile digital progress can be, especially when a few bad apples ruin things for everyone else.
Reformers must push not just for enforcement, but for systems that center access, dignity, and accountability for all, staff included.
🖤 Love what we do? Support Clutch.
Something went wrong. Please refresh the page and/or try again.
