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

Beeper Mini is back

blog.beeper.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 1001 posts

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#381

Post by haswell »

nkcmr wrote: post #104

Yeah, I am not expecting this to be a protracted game of cat and mouse. Apple will just sue them in the end; that'll put a REAL quick stop to this. I wish things had more interoperability, but Apple is under no obligation to implement it or be okay with it. And honestly, I believe them when they say that this is a security/privacy risk; even if it does serve their anticompetitive tendencies.

Tech journalists have noted that this kind of reverse engineering for the purpose of interoperability is specifically covered (allowed) by applicable laws. I’m not well versed in the related laws, but it at least seems on the surface that lawsuits may not be the end here.

If it’s a security issue, that’s on Apple’s architecture. They can cat and mouse this, but the more times they catch the mouse, the worse this looks for Apple because it effectively means that iMessage was never secure to begin with. Only time will tell how effectively they can address this.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#382

Post by WendyTheWillow »

supermatt wrote: post #266

Apples response: > These techniques posed significant risks to user security and privacy, including the potential for metadata exposure and enabling unwanted messages, spam, and phishing attacks. Didn’t it recently come to light that apple have been “exposing” that metadata to government agencies for years? Maybe they should stop exposing metadata rather than blaming others for replicating their implementation! How d…

You can't imagine how exposing a new, automatable interface might increase spam?

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#383

Post by oldandboring »

riedel wrote: post #372

Got myself a apple ID for fun but cannot sign in, as SMS second factor fails in Beeper Mini. Wonder if they found another way again to detect the 'fraud'.

You're way ahead of me then. Out of curiosity I tried to register a new Apple ID to use with the updated app and the registration page throws 400 at me no matter what I input.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#384

Post by [deleted] »

supermatt wrote: post #266

Apples response: > These techniques posed significant risks to user security and privacy, including the potential for metadata exposure and enabling unwanted messages, spam, and phishing attacks. Didn’t it recently come to light that apple have been “exposing” that metadata to government agencies for years? Maybe they should stop exposing metadata rather than blaming others for replicating their implementation! How d…

[deleted]

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#385

Post by mike_d »

arilotter wrote: post #347
mike_d wrote: post #330

> If Apple insists, we would consider adding a pager emoji to metadata on all messages sent via Beeper Mini. This would make it easy for Messages App to filter out any messages from Beeper Mini users. As an iPhone user I would love for them to do this so I can not communicate with these users. The green/blue bubble gives me an indication of the encryption being used, and presenting a blue bubble while the messages ar…

Beeper Mini does not MITM messages - it's a reverse engineering of how iMessage works, and runs entirely on-device, without putting messages thru Beeper's servers. It talks directly to Apple and pretends to be an iPhone. You're thinking of Beeper Cloud, which does iMessage thru a Mac Mini in the cloud.

Even if it is done on device, the Beeper app is an effective MITM on what should be communications between official clients. It could have security issues, be logging everything to disk, or include a third party analytics SDK that is snarfing data for marketing. Like I said, if they want to flag the communications as being from an unofficial client I am ok with that.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#386

Post by modeless »

foxhill wrote: post #30

the optics are already less than ideal for apple. beeper mini dismisses the any technical challenge apple may claim a hurdle to android having iMessage. i don’t doubt this will also get shutdown in the near term, but i’m 70% confident in a surprising acquisition & continued support from apple in the longer term. it will be hard for apple to continue to claim they are pro-user when they appear to be this hostile towar…

Acquiring Beeper would paint a giant target on the iMessage team. "Reverse engineer iMessage to make an Android app and get a payday from Apple, guaranteed!" 0% likelihood of that.

It would make more sense for Google to acquire them, and start the inevitable court fight with the best legal team money can buy instead of whatever Beeper can afford right now. But Google would probably prefer to stay out of it, so it remains a David and Goliath fight as long as possible.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#387

Post by _gabe_ »

SpaceManNabs wrote: post #323
_gabe_ wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s false based on what? Your own anecdotal experience? I have a friend group that has iPhones and Androids. We went on vacation and had to jump through so many hoops just to share our pictures. We don’t care what devices everybody uses, because why the heck should that matter? The fact that it can be simple to share high fidelity pictures and videos, but it isn’t just because Apple wants their walled garden benefit…

The technie vs normie divide exemplified right here in these comments. You don't hear iPhone users begging their friends to get on signal unless they are discussing drugs or sensitive topics. You hear android users ask iphone users to install wtv app all the time. And I am talking about anecdotes here, but there are well-document events (some that happened this year) that do emphasize what I am saying. I won't share…

I didn’t mention this, because it doesn’t matter. I use an iPhone. I’m writing this on an iPhone. I use a MacBook. Why the heck should I care about my friends and family paying some “Apple status” fee to get an iPhone just so I can share pictures and videos with them?

> iPhone users mostly just want android users to get iphones. Doesn't matter why.

This is anecdotal. Where is the data proclaiming this? I’ve never personally met somebody that cares what brand of phone you have.

And I guess it should also be said, I don’t use drugs or anything. I just want to be able to message friends and family without pointless restrictions. I don’t know where you’re getting these ideas from.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#388

Post by dev_tty01 »

matsemann wrote: post #46
martinky24 wrote: post #13

These Beeper folk sound a bit entitled. As was repeatedly mentioned in the other thread [1], building production applications on top of an undocumented and unsupported (in terms of backwards compatability, etc) API is a nightmare that should be avoided. Apple has every right to change their API, if they do Beeper will go down, and Beeper will blame Apple. I understand Apple's incentives to not want to be in this situ…

When did HN get so anti-consumer, anti- hacker , anti-freedom, pro-proprietary? Them taking the fight with Apple should be applauded. A walled down proprietary message platform only a few can use is stupid to fight in favor of.

Beeper is trying to build a business based on unauthorized use of another company's servers. Apple customer's pay the Apple premium for their phones and get iMessage at no charge for the life of the device. Beeper charges its customers for a service that is paid for by Apple. How is that ok?

>> "only a few can use"

There are about 1.5 billion iPhone users in the world.

As far as proprietary services, the world is full of them. Google, Meta, X, Instagram, .... Apple built a service to provide advanced messaging services to their many customers. It comes with the phone. Should Apple be required to freely give iPhone cameras to people who don't buy their phone? How about the Touch ID module?

There are plenty of cross platform messaging apps available on iOS. The only thing that could be considered anti-competitive is the inability to change the default messaging app on iOS. Apple has fixed this for some of the other built-in apps, but not messaging yet. I would agree that that should be fixed. However, Beeper is not offering an alternative messaging platform, they are selling access to Apple's platform.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#389

Post by r3trohack3r »

snakeyjake wrote: post #290
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…

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…

> iMessage … messaging platform

For me, personally, it’s an SMS app not general messaging. And on iOS there is absolutely no competition for SMS by design.

I suspect iMessage would enjoy far less adoption if the iMessage features were a separate application from the SMS features, or if a 3rd party app could assume the role of handling SMS (I.E. Signal).

If Signal were allowed to handle SMS on an iPhone, ditching iMessage would be one of the first things I’d do when setting up my device.

On iOS, if I want to send a message to a phone number using a cross-platform protocol that (nearly?) all cellphones understand by default without coordinating a separate communication channel out-of-band, my option is: iMessage. That is not organic, it’s Apple using its position as the device manufacturer to force all competition out of the SMS space, and then offering a “progressive enhancement” on top of an open protocol that nobody else can compete with or interopt with.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#390

Post by gkbrk »

ethanbond wrote: post #193
Laaas wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What grounds would Apple have for suing?

"No reverse engineering" is a pretty standard TOS item.

Reverse engineering for the purpose of interoperability is explicitly allowed.

Also, breaking the TOS is usually not illegal. TOS of a random company is not the law, otherwise you would get into trouble non-stop from random websites and apps making you "agree" to things.

Post reply on HN