591–600 of 902 posts
Dang, I support your efforts but I just don't have any incentive to pay for a texting app. Normal texting and WhatsApp and discord and Instagram and tiktok messages etc etc are all free. So I just don't really have a reason to subscribe to this.
Does this mean it’s trivial to spoof iMessage from arbitrary phone numbers not already registered with iMessage, or hijack any non-iPhone users SMS messages by tricking the iPhones they communicate with to send replies via iMessage to the spoofer rather than SMS? If this is true, (edit: probably not true,) and I’m just speculating without specific knowledge, it seems Apple would shut this down for legitimate security…
I have no idea how it's implemented by Apple but I'd hope there's some sort of expiry time. I'm sure they've thought of SIM-swapping as a way to take over people's accounts.
Does this mean it’s trivial to spoof iMessage from arbitrary phone numbers not already registered with iMessage, or hijack any non-iPhone users SMS messages by tricking the iPhones they communicate with to send replies via iMessage to the spoofer rather than SMS? If this is true, (edit: probably not true,) and I’m just speculating without specific knowledge, it seems Apple would shut this down for legitimate security…
I just tried out the app - an SMS challenge was sent to my phone number, and the app sends a response via SMS. By challenge, I mean there's several fields with encoded data (not just a 6-digit OTP). I have no idea how it's implemented by Apple but I'd hope there's some sort of expiry time. I'm sure they've thought of SIM-swapping as a way to take over people's accounts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well messaging for one thing... Some others: - Find my device features including Bluetooth ping networking (airtags, Tile, Android's upcoming network) - Airdrop/Nearby Share - Bluetooth LE proximity pairing (at least I doubt this works when pairing cross ecosystem) - Carplay/Android Auto - Airplay/Google Cast
okay but this "interoperability" is legitimately hard without degrading the user experience because apple's unique level of control allows it to produce a superior product with more consistency. airdrop is best-in-class; open-source solutions like wi-fi direct are dumpsterfires with trash UX. LE proximity pairing is, i believe, a custom chip apple put in airpods (h1 chip) because bluetooth is stuck in 2005 and still…
Another way to read this: Apple has a superior product because they perform anti-competitive practices and don't allow other companies to out-product them. And when they do, they buy them/shut them down before anyone is the wiser.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are reverse engineering/interoperability exemptions to the DMCA so it may not be that simple. So would be curious if they have already sought legal advice which says they are in the clear.
they raised $16mm. I assure you they've talked with a lawyer or two.
How come there’s a waitlist for the main product but not this one? I feel like it should be the other way around?
These are two completely different concepts?
I’m aware third-party clients have existed for eons.
I also believe Apple would shut this down.
This downloads from GitHub and ’executes’ specific code points in what looks like a proprietary Apple binary, ‘IMDAppleServices’. Where was that binary sourced? Could you provide more context for what is performed at the hard-coded call-in addresses in your code? Does this relate to how you’re presenting a unique device identifier to the network? Do all clients share one identifier, or is it generated per Apple ID? H…
I am not the developer but I also looked at that binary to help the project at some point. It's taken straight from OS X 10.8 (more precisely from an Update Combo on their download portal). It's calling NACInit, NACKeyEstablishment and NACSign functions from it (which have no entry points but with reverse engineering the offsets have been figured out). They are themselves relying on OS X system functions to get devic…