831–840 of 1001 posts
What’s between the lines is that iMessage is critical as a way to lock in users to iOS. People care about security somewhat but they care way more about being ostracized for having green bubbles. I bet few common users could tell you the security properties of major messaging apps. This app, if allowed, would have shaved off a parentage points off iPhone market share.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As with any system, it is just a matter of time before loopholes are found and exploited.
As with any policy, it will be up to the Government to use its three branches of power to determine and enforce their laws.
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 claims iMessage is E2EE, do we have proof they aren't siphoning the messages from the client once it's been decrypted? Actually it is documented by Apple themselves that they receive the encrypted messages and the key to decrypt them when iCloud backup is used (unless you and the person you are messaging have specifically enabled their "advanced data protection" feature). They have decrypted messages in respo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Beeper (not mini) is already a company - it's an app that aggregates the various other networks friends and family insist on using. WhatsApp, FB Messenger, Telegram, Instagram, etc. Been using it a while now, pretty good. This was a proof of concept to expand that app, it's not the entire company
I would agree if they hadn't completely redone their website to remove every reference to Beeper Cloud. They really made it look like a deprecated product, not a good alternative that won't get blocked.
There's always a possibility of me being wrong! It does look like a bit of a pivot doesn't it.. Good point, well made.
I think I'll go double check I can still log in to my chat apps directly just in case haha
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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I recently switched from Android to iOS just for iMessage. SMS is quite unreliable even in 2023. SMS messages don't have the same delivery guarantees as IP-based messaging services. And often I have internet access, but spotty cellular service. The thing that pushed me over the edge was that my carrier happened to block all my SMS for a day. I only found out about it later in the day, after I had missed many (unrecov…
I don't understand, why don't you force them to use Whatsapp (or Signal, or whatever) to contact you? Get an app that rejects by default SMSes coming from certain numbers. They want to text you at all? They need to use Whatsapp, otherwise they can go fuck themselves. (It worked for me when a friend wanted to force me to contact him on Telegram rather than Whatsapp- I resisted for weeks but at the end I gave in). Once…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Keep in mind that this is spin — Erik's statement is ridiculous, and he knows it. To think that Apple would somehow not treat Beeper like any other bad actor hacking iMessage protocols is delulu.
Sure, that's fair. But if he knows that, why spend the time to build this app in the first place? Is it a marketing play? It did buy them a whole lot of attention.
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? I'm torn on this. Is it following the hacker spirit to get more people plugged into Apple's closed ecosystem? Maybe? Maybe not? Reverse engineering a proprietary protocol is certainly hacker-y. But building a business around that -- essentially charging people to put more load onto someone else's infrastructure, who have to bear the costs (even a rich behemoth like Apple) -- I'm not…
As one of the top posts that presumably the GP post is talking about, precisely. Nowhere was I apologizing for Apple, nor did I "crawl out".
When this product was first announced I observed that Apple was going to shut it down, and that they had obvious avenues (both technically given the way messages are attested to, and legally -- this product is the textbook definition of computer misuse! And they're charging for it making it a slam dunk). Loads of people "crawled out" to gloat that this is it, Apple has no avenue to do anything about it. And then Apple did something. Apple did the easiest, lightest option, but they could go full scorched Earth if they wanted to. I don't want them to, and am not celebrating that, but these are basic obvious facts.
To your other point, exactly. The hacker spirit is getting your friends and family on Signal. It isn't cementing iMessages as the foundation.