Beeper Mini is back • Hacker News Board

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#281

Post by UseStrict » Mon, Dec 11, 2023, 6:39 PM UTC

mmanfrin wrote: post #244

lacker wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best case outcome is to get publicity leading to US and EU antitrust regulators to file a lawsuit against Apple, both of which Apple loses. The conclusion of this lawsuit is that not only must Apple allow access to iMessage, they also must allow changing the default for every component of iOS - messaging app, browser, app store, let you replace Siri with other voice assistants - and to lower the 30% app store fee…

Ironically, if Google were ever allowed to replace siri on iPhones, I would probably never buy an android again.

Siri is so incompetent it's basically unusable. I would love if they were forced to allow 3rd party assistants.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#282

Post by danaris » Mon, Dec 11, 2023, 6:40 PM UTC

ankit219 wrote: post #222

qrohlf wrote: post #29

I’m curious what their best-case outcome is here. It’s fully transparent at this point that Apple has no appetite for a third party iMessage client on any platform and will take whatever technical steps needed to prevent this from happening. I’d wager heavily that even if Beeper plays cat-and-mouse to the point where they’ve exhausted Apple’s budget for blocking them and somehow managed to avoid Apple’s legal team pu…

I think they ignored a rarely talked about but important aspect. iMessage is free for Apple users because it comes bundled with all Apple products. The cost to run iMessage and deliver millions of messages daily must be a significant number. With beeper, they are enabling the functionality for android. That is every android user signed up with beeper will end up costing Apple some money to send messages to iphone (or…

Based on my understanding, Beeper is using false or duplicate Apple device credentials in order to authenticate with Apple as "being a legitimate iMessage endpoint".

There's no need to take the—rather draconian—step of locking out all Apple users who are using Apple IDs through the browser; all Apple needs to do is ban the false device IDs and possibly close the loophole that allows Beeper to create them.

Any time you see something that looks like a jailbreak, at its heart is a vulnerability in the device or service that is being jailbroken. That is, fundamentally, a security flaw, and fixing that security flaw is all that's necessary to prevent the jailbreak. The fact that this one is with one of Apple's services, rather than with iPhones or other Apple devices, means that they don't even have to push out some software/firmware update and hope everyone applies it: all they have to do is update their own servers, and Beeper will be locked out again.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#283

Post by Nextgrid » Mon, Dec 11, 2023, 6:40 PM UTC

MitchellKnight wrote: post #103

Isn't this a violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act or other US laws? Doesn't the fact they are trying to make money off of this negate any ethical hacker arguments?

Beeper doesn't "hack" anything though, it uses the exact same authorization mechanism as a real iOS device and grants the user access to no more than a real device would.

I agree that the CFAA can be abused to try and prosecute this (as well as the DMCA), and I suspect Beeper is intentionally hoping for (heavily publicized) litigation to settle this once and for all and set a precedent.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#284

Post by misnome » Mon, Dec 11, 2023, 6:40 PM UTC

mschuster91 wrote: post #215

misnome wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US? When has that ever happened in the last 30 years? I’d buy the EU stepping in to mandate interoperability though. I’d welcome that! But… shouldn’t mostly everyone here view needing the EU to force the behaviour of a US company kind of against the entire supposed benefit of the US system and the purpose of the domain this forum is hosted on?

> But… shouldn’t mostly everyone here view needing the EU to force the behaviour of a US company kind of against the entire supposed benefit of the US system and the purpose of the domain this forum is hosted on? European here. From my POV it seems as if the USA have forgotten that for a truly free market to exist, there needs to be serious oversight to prevent capitalism from devolving into "corporate Darwinism" - a…

Also European^wfrom the european area (I think you get lynched here if you say that after brexit), and I completely agree. But it seems an awful lot of USian cheer for “free markets” only when it is giving the specific outcome they personally want, and I think you should mostly approach these “US Company” issues without the expectation of a Europarliament-ex-machina solution.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#285

Post by skeaker » Mon, Dec 11, 2023, 6:40 PM UTC

theklr wrote: post #165

afavour wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way I see it Beeper are deliberately poking the bear. They knew Apple would block their implementation (I wouldn’t be at all surprised if they had this replacement ready to go). You don’t have to trust them, if you don’t want to use the service then don’t. They’re highlighting the closed nature of Apple’s messaging system more effectively than anyone has in a long time. I support them in doing that.

Only question is what’s the endgame? It’s not like they’re going to gain meaningful followers from this. This happens every 3-5 years with something Apple does and all that happens is Apple hardens even more, the little guy gets some press for a month and then disappears into the ethers

They are absolutely getting followers from this. You're talking about them now, whereas hardly anyone was a week ago.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#286

Post by biorach » Mon, Dec 11, 2023, 6:40 PM UTC

How is it better than, e.g. Whatsapp ?

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#287

Post by lopkeny12ko » Mon, Dec 11, 2023, 6:41 PM UTC

UmYeahNo wrote: post #249

lopkeny12ko wrote: post #220

Beeper has caught a ton of media attention in recent weeks but I truly do not understand it. The SMS protocol has been around for decades and works perfectly fine with iPhones. If you want rich media and other bells and whistles, use WhatsApp. How often does someone whine so loudly about insisting on using the closed, Apple-proprietary protocol that their friends need to pay a monthly subscription for a third party i…

I tell you what, if you're a young person you can be publicly shamed for having the wrong color bubble, or outcast by being excluded from a group chat. To you and I that probably doesn't make sense, but for a big portion of the young, phone using population being unable to participate in the iMessage ecosystem is a huge deal socially. You are essentially excluded from the friend group, you're excluded from conversati…

Those young people are probably doing themselves a favor by disassociating from peers who are shallow and prejudiced enough to exclude someone for, of all things, not using a specific (proprietary!) chat app.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#288

Post by Nextgrid » Mon, Dec 11, 2023, 6:41 PM UTC

unstatusthequo wrote: post #279

They sure are trying hard to get sued.

I suspect they are hoping for it and have a rich benefactor who's willing to see this fight to the very end, in hopes of setting a precedent.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#289

Post by maratc » Mon, Dec 11, 2023, 6:41 PM UTC

RKearney wrote: post #260

maratc wrote: post #227

Living in the country where absolutely no one uses iMessage, the whole kerfuffle about the colour of the message bubble leaves me completely flabbergasted. I mean, probably the curvature of the Earth is involved, but from here this looks like a very small hill to die on.

iMessage is not about the color of the bubble. While the color is what's most noticeable to the end user, a non-iMessage chat means: 1. Unable to rename group chats 2. Photo sharing quality is lowered 3. Video sharing quality is abysmal 4. Messages traverse carrier networks in plain-text 5. Loss of undo send and delete 6. Loss of inline replies 7. Loss of typing indicators and read-receipts (if enabled) Just to name…

I won't doubt the fact that you know that other cross-platform messaging apps exist.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#290

Post by snakeyjake » Mon, Dec 11, 2023, 6:41 PM UTC

lacker wrote: post #148

qrohlf wrote: post #29

I’m curious what their best-case outcome is here. It’s fully transparent at this point that Apple has no appetite for a third party iMessage client on any platform and will take whatever technical steps needed to prevent this from happening. I’d wager heavily that even if Beeper plays cat-and-mouse to the point where they’ve exhausted Apple’s budget for blocking them and somehow managed to avoid Apple’s legal team pu…

The best case outcome is to get publicity leading to US and EU antitrust regulators to file a lawsuit against Apple, both of which Apple loses. The conclusion of this lawsuit is that not only must Apple allow access to iMessage, they also must allow changing the default for every component of iOS - messaging app, browser, app store, let you replace Siri with other voice assistants - and to lower the 30% app store fee…

How is this an actionable anti-trust issue?

iMessage doesn't even register as a messaging platform in the minds of most users globally.

In the US is it dwarfed by at least three other platforms.

Globally, do any of the other top ten (Apple is nowhere near the top ten) messaging apps allow third parties to spoof their service?

The purpose of anti-trust is to increase competition and prevent unlawful monopolies. Apple is a flea on the tail of an ox when it comes to messaging, as capable of influencing the market as I am.