Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google argues iMessage should be regulated by the EU's Digital Markets Act

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 103 posts

Re: Google argues iMessage should be regulated by the EU's Digital Markets Act

#61

Post by dagmx »

remotefonts wrote: post #52
nerdjon wrote: post #16

I do have some slightly concerns about iMessage being opened up and no longer linked to Apple products for a spam standpoint. But I get plenty of SMS spam so I guess it's really not much of a difference. However kinda related I am curious about RCS. I tried looking this up but I can't find much concrete information on it. Is it actually universally E2E or only some? I find some reddit posts implying it's some. Do all…

Do cell phone network carriers even have any part on RCS messages? If I have no wifi and no mobile data but still have minutes and sms's no RCS message will ever leave my device, so I would say all of them will go though google servers, because if they can't reach google servers they will not even leave your phone to go anywhere. Such a beautiful mess. What's not to love about it?

It depends if you’re using Google’s RCS or not. Different carriers also support RCS via their servers. What you have access to depends on your device and carrier.

Re: Google argues iMessage should be regulated by the EU's Digital Markets Act

#62

Post by quitit »

repelsteeltje wrote: post #2

Sigh. It was to be expected that regulation intended to shield users from big tech harm is twisted to instead have one giant attack another.

The EU have a proven history of not being very good at foreseeing obvious, unintended consequences, they also have no history of addressing those short-comings after they arise which is a weakness common to legislative bodies (large, slow, and change requires significant effort to generate support.) So it strikes me as a bit insane that they want to make a lot of very large changes simultaneously.

Of the new proposed changes, I can see so few actually rendering any net benefit to the consumer and EU businesses. There is so much wishful thinking going on here.

Do EU lawmakers believe that these changes will let EU tech businesses shoehorn themselves into these large, difficult to compete against platforms? It is not clear that it'll just be a land rush lead by large american tech companies. Then for any EU companies that do find a niche, they will simply be bought out - just like how the EU's AI darlings were.

It's like they have been baited into this maliciously: why wouldn't the EU introduce changes in a controlled roll out, where they can manage unintended consequences and limit the political fallout for problems that arise. Doing all of this at once is insanely risk-filled, and I feel this will put the journey to consumer protections on the back foot. A politician is not going to have the appetite to delve into this if it turns into toxic soup, meanwhile other countries progress will stall as they gesture warningly at the EU's mistakes.

Re: Google argues iMessage should be regulated by the EU's Digital Markets Act

#63

Post by frizlab »

kevingadd wrote: post #42
funnybeam wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“ businesses and their relationships with consumers” Sounds like spam to me

You realize there are actual legitimate uses of SMS and people choose to use it, right?

There are few, and it open the door to spam, yes. I’d rather than not even have the possibility.

Re: Google argues iMessage should be regulated by the EU's Digital Markets Act

#64

Post by quitit »

nikanj wrote: post #9
superduty wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Breaking the law?

”They’re not allowing our spam on your phones!” I get so much SMS and email spam. I get so little iMessage spam. If getting green texts from Android users is the price I have to pay, so be it.

The odd thing about all of this - why do they think Apple will make the messages from other platforms blue?

Of course they won't, because there won't be feature parity. The point of SMSes remaining green even though that they are largely without cost is because it signals to the user that iMessage's/Facetime's features aren't available.

Google who argued that apple's designs aren't worthy of protection are now arguing that the colour of a freaking text bubble has great importance. Which one is it?

Re: Google argues iMessage should be regulated by the EU's Digital Markets Act

#65

Post by foota »

funnybeam wrote: post #39
foota wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think this is an accurate take. The DMA is about businesses and their relationships with consumers, so any regulation has to be targeted to that. The argument is that Apple not allowing businesses to use a protocol on par with iMessage is the issue here.

“ businesses and their relationships with consumers” Sounds like spam to me

How is this related to spam? Apple has the same ability to filter SMS messages as it does iMessage, this is purely about the format.

Re: Google argues iMessage should be regulated by the EU's Digital Markets Act

#66

Post by nickthegreek »

deadmutex wrote: post #34
garciasn wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never used WhatsApp, Telegram, or Signal but I have used iMessage/SMS. I really don't consider iMessage anything separate from being able to send SMSs; I just know that sometimes my messages are green and most are blue. I'd be surprised if iMessage users think as much about this as much as Android users and/or Google execs do.

> I'd be surprised if iMessage users think as much about this as much as Android users and/or Google execs do. I am guessing you're not a teenager in highschool.

83% of teenagers in high school had iPhone in 2019. Android was 9%. So even in high school, at this point, it’s an extreme minority problem. The green bubble war is over and Apple won the youth.

Re: Google argues iMessage should be regulated by the EU's Digital Markets Act

#67

Post by pests »

nerdjon wrote: post #46
kelnos wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is it actually universally E2E or only some? I find some reddit posts implying it's some. The E2EE on RCS is an extension to the protocol developed by Google. I don't know who has implemented it other than Google. So if a user is on a carrier that does their own RCS impl (many carriers piggyback off of Google's so they don't have to deal with it), they may not have E2EE. > Do all RCS messages go through Google's se…

Interesting, assuming this is all correct (I tried to look around and the information on this seems to be purposefully vague from a marketing standpoint for RCS.). I am perfectly fine with Apple not rushing to implement RCS. It may be a business decision for their part but any chance that the messages information will go through Google's servers is a full no go for me and is not a valid alternative in my opinion. Eve…

If you don't use iPhone and Apple implements RCS then it is your decision to send data to Google by your choice of which phone you choose.

If you do use iPhone then you could selectively choose not to RCS texts contacts that you know use a Google RCS implementation.

Re: Google argues iMessage should be regulated by the EU's Digital Markets Act

#68

Post by smoldesu »

frizlab wrote: post #63
kevingadd wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You realize there are actual legitimate uses of SMS and people choose to use it, right?

There are few, and it open the door to spam, yes. I’d rather than not even have the possibility.

Any sufficiently advanced networked computer will have the potential for spam or malicious users. iMessage already sees this without being an open protocol; it's deeply-integrated nature makes it a prime vector for malware and 0-click spyware. Adversaries like NSO Group actively exploit this.

The goal isn't a more locked-down phone, it's transparent communications infrastructure that inherently resists attackers. Anything else is an imperfect solution that relies on trust more than mechanical security. If Apple wants to lead the way on that, they should do the world a favor and propose their own open SMS encryption standard. As it stands, their 'ours is better but we wont show you' approach is about as obvious as security theater gets.

Re: Google argues iMessage should be regulated by the EU's Digital Markets Act

#69

Post by pests »

justsomehnguy wrote: post #43
SirMaster wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because if I put someone's phone number into my Messages app, 100% of people will receive my messages with no issue. To decide to use WhatsApp or Signal or Telegram etc I would have to find out if they even have that service/app set up or not. And they have to have the app installed and signed in etc. With iMessage/SMS there is no setup, no sign-in, no approval process or anything.

Take Apple fanboying out of your mind. This is exactly how it happens, you just add someone's phone number to your address book and... and it works? All those services rely on the phone numbers to discover if you can message to the other party. You literally see if the addressee can be called/sent message through WhatsApp. Sure, it's not in your Messages app, but that's because Apple doesn't allow you to see any mess…

I think it's true that Apple doesn't show your contacts status of other people in the Messages app itself but it does show your contacts alternative way to message if you have it added - looking at a random contact I see a button inside Contacts to launch a chat via FB Messenger there.

While not exactly the same it is useful

Re: Google argues iMessage should be regulated by the EU's Digital Markets Act

#70

Post by nerdjon »

pests wrote: post #67
nerdjon wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting, assuming this is all correct (I tried to look around and the information on this seems to be purposefully vague from a marketing standpoint for RCS.). I am perfectly fine with Apple not rushing to implement RCS. It may be a business decision for their part but any chance that the messages information will go through Google's servers is a full no go for me and is not a valid alternative in my opinion. Eve…

If you don't use iPhone and Apple implements RCS then it is your decision to send data to Google by your choice of which phone you choose. If you do use iPhone then you could selectively choose not to RCS texts contacts that you know use a Google RCS implementation.

That doesn't seem to be the case based on how I am understanding what was said?

If RCS goes through my carrier it is up to my carrier if it's Google's implementation or not? Meaning Google's servers or not?

If the person I am talking too is on an Android phone I would also assume the same, that the text is likely going through Google's servers at some point.

Needing to know whether or not a specific contact is using Google's RCS implementation seems like quite the hassle when "Google" is the flaw for RCS in my opinion.

If I am misunderstanding, I would love to be corrected.

Post reply on HN