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

Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

601–610 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#601

Post by ehsankia »

thathndude wrote: post #585
llm_nerd wrote: post #290

This was the obvious outcome. People were being willfully blind about how this "hack" works. Using an exfiltrated binary they used its blackbox functions to perform a sort of device attestation using ripped Apple device identifiers. Clearly Apple simply needs to blacklist any device attestation that this service uses, which is obviously trivial. These aren't just RNGs they're fabricating, they're sets of legitimate A…

And there was major hubris from the makers. They were arguing that because it was all totally above board Apple wouldn’t be able to block the service without impairing iMessage entirely. Wrong

> because it was all totally above board

What do you mean by above board? What they claimed is that there is no way of telling Beeper Mini clients from an old iPhone, therefore Apple wouldn't be able to block one without blocking the other.

Clearly Apple managed to find a way, and who knows if there will be some more cat and mouse happening here. In theory though, I don't see why it wouldn't be possible to have a service that's indistinguishable from an old iPhone.

Newer devices can use device attestation, but old iPhones don't have secure enclave.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#602

Post by cphoover »

StressedDev wrote: post #143

One thing which is really confusing is why are Android users obsessed with iMessage? Android users can send text messages to iPhones, the can call iPhone users, and they can use third party messaging apps to communicate with iPhone users. It really isn’t clear to me why so many people are so angry they cannot use iMessage on Android.

My whole family uses iMessage because it is the default client on their iphones. I'd love to partake in the family group chat.

For those technically savvy enough to download an additional client like Meta's Whatsapp or Messenger... it's no problem, but for the less technically inclined (like my mother) they will just use the default client.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#603

Post by [deleted] »

russelg wrote: post #336

Where is the hacker spirit here? The number of Apple apologists that have crawled out to say "see? I told you so!!" is saddening. It is a bit dicey when you're charging for it, but since Mini was entirely client-side it would be feasible for a free version to exist. Apple claims iMessage is E2EE, do we have proof they aren't siphoning the messages from the client once it's been decrypted? The level of trust we have t…

[deleted]

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#604

Post by seizethegdgap »

jiggawatts wrote: post #583
vore wrote: post #495

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because "private" here is regarding the cryptography and not regarding the disclosure? How are users supposed to obtain this key to use the service without it being published?

“How can people get into my locked door if I don’t tape a key to it for them to use?” If the private key is public, it does nothing by definition and it may as well not exist! Just use plain text, HTTP, or whatever and stop fooling yourself. It’s like calling an open field a “secure facility”. The name is not the thing, the map is not the territory. Private keys are only private if they’re not public.

You're not sharing the key to your house, you're sharing the key to one of the biggest skyscrapers in the world.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#605

Post by dzikimarian »

crazygringo wrote: post #410
russelg wrote: post #336

Where is the hacker spirit here? The number of Apple apologists that have crawled out to say "see? I told you so!!" is saddening. It is a bit dicey when you're charging for it, but since Mini was entirely client-side it would be feasible for a free version to exist. Apple claims iMessage is E2EE, do we have proof they aren't siphoning the messages from the client once it's been decrypted? The level of trust we have t…

> Where is the hacker spirit here? The hacker spirit is the fun of reverse engineering. The hacker spirit is about personal use. It's not expecting to be able to turn it into a business , or a popular app, that wouldn't quickly be shut down. That's just common sense. > Myself for example owns a Macbook, but an Android phone. Am I not allowed to use iMessage? I paid the toll. Of course you can. It's sitting there on y…

No. Hacker spirit is owning your machine to its full extent. For fun, for profit or just for mayhem.

Apple using instant messaging, where no meaningful innovation happened for decades to build their moat is pathetic and disgusting.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#606

Post by justapassenger »

russelg wrote: post #336

Where is the hacker spirit here? The number of Apple apologists that have crawled out to say "see? I told you so!!" is saddening. It is a bit dicey when you're charging for it, but since Mini was entirely client-side it would be feasible for a free version to exist. Apple claims iMessage is E2EE, do we have proof they aren't siphoning the messages from the client once it's been decrypted? The level of trust we have t…

[dead]

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#607

Post by empyrrhicist »

skygazer wrote: post #413
empyrrhicist wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, totally understandable that this would be blocked within our legal system... but its a proof of concept that it would not be burdensome for apple to enable interoperability. We should be demanding support for open standards for messaging from mono/duopolists like Apple/Google.

In my experience, incoming SMS are mostly spam, and other low trust notifications, while incoming iMessages, even if unknown to me, are likely to be real people. Buying an Apple device is an expensive signal, and Apple will quickly shut down abusers, maintaining that relatively high bar. Letting (actual) Android users use iMessage probably wouldn’t affect that, but the open source hack/reversing of it opened the door…

Who is talking about SMS? Not I.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#608

Post by empyrrhicist »

eek2121 wrote: post #544
rezonant wrote: post #493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you might be mistaking what monopoly/duopoly is being mentioned here. Those companies aren't phone manufacturers and they don't make phone texting apps. The distinction might not matter to you, but it's clearly the meaning of the GP. You can say iMessage isn't a texting app because iMessage functionally (as in, the technical details) works like a non-texting app, but it is the only texting app on those phones…

You are aware that iPhones have many alternative messaging apps right? The second part of your comment is simply not true.

Yet you cannot set a new default messaging app...

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#609

Post by epistasis »

SaberTail wrote: post #471
russelg wrote: post #336

Where is the hacker spirit here? The number of Apple apologists that have crawled out to say "see? I told you so!!" is saddening. It is a bit dicey when you're charging for it, but since Mini was entirely client-side it would be feasible for a free version to exist. Apple claims iMessage is E2EE, do we have proof they aren't siphoning the messages from the client once it's been decrypted? The level of trust we have t…

Apple wouldn't even exist if not for this type of hacking. One of Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak's first projects was selling blue boxes[1] to play around on AT&T's telephone system. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_box

And the penalty for getting caught wasn't merely having your connection turned off, it was a trial.

Selling a device that transgressed the boundaries doesn't mean they thought that no boundaries should exist, it just means they knew it was possible to do something technically interesting and would allow them to make money.

If Jobs and Woz thought there should be now penalties for using blue boxes, my guess is that they thought the telco should merely implement a better system, not that everybody should get free access to it.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#610

Post by twodave »

ShamelessC wrote: post #552
dagmx wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why people shouldn’t listen to tech YouTubers who don’t actually work in tech as engineers. They’re tech fans, not experts but act like they know the domain space enough to make strong authoritative claims since that’s what gives them an audience.

There were a number of similar comments on HN when they announced. The real lesson? The internet is a shit show.

I don’t know about you, but I’ve worked with plenty of “engineers” who can’t even properly read a stack trace. Not meaning to offend, most software developers are unable to reason about a system even as straightforward as a messaging client with accuracy, especially a closed source one.
Post reply on HN