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

iMessage with PQ3 Cryptographic Protocol

security.apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 280 posts

Re: iMessage with PQ3 Cryptographic Protocol

#181

Post by kergonath »

tsunamifury wrote: post #39
kergonath wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes but that would have meant giving up sales in exchange for actually backing up their words. I saw that you moved the goalposts in your reply, but anyway: which words? > They aren’t even going to use the developed encrypted RCS protocol. The protocol that was designed by Google and in which Google’s infrastructure is crucial? It’s not Apple’s fault that RCS does not have mandatory end-to-end encryption. > I have…

I worked on several integration attempts between Apple and Google. They often presented specs that clearly showed security holes then simply would deny they were there or say “that’s secure”. It was a truly wild experience.

This sounds fascinating, you really should write about this.

Re: iMessage with PQ3 Cryptographic Protocol

#182

Post by simondotau »

illiac786 wrote: post #164
snazz wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You text them a link to join the call. The Android user can’t be the one to initiate.

Oh. Ok that's never going to work. "Hey there please click on this link to talk to me" => Malware! Blocked.

It’s how many Zoom and Teams calls terminate. Not saying it’s a good idea, but it’s not especially unusual.

Re: iMessage with PQ3 Cryptographic Protocol

#183

Post by simondotau »

kelnos wrote: post #167
snazz wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You text them a link to join the call. The Android user can’t be the one to initiate.

> The Android user can’t be the one to initiate. That sounds like a bad joke. "Everyone can use Facetime, except if you're on a certain platform you have to ask someone on the 'real' platform to initiate the call." That's... not a viable communication method.

Nobody is claiming that FaceTime is the singular universal communications method. Certainly not Apple.

Re: iMessage with PQ3 Cryptographic Protocol

#184

Post by [deleted] »

andy_xor_andrew wrote: post #126
sandyarmstrong wrote: post #15

This is pretty fascinating. For easier reading, the Signal blog post [0] they link to is great. Both Signal and Apple went with CRYSTALS-Kyber [1] as their post-quantum algorithm. If you're interested in the math, and maybe learned at some point about how classic public key cryptography is built on the idea that it's easy to multiply two primes, but hard to factor them, and how this (or other math problems) can be us…

I'm way out of my depth in terms of the math here. But my 'software engineer brain' likes the ideal of using the prime factoring problem, because it's so simple to understand, and feels like some kind of universal primitive. "It's easy to multiply but hard to factor." It just seems so intuitive. But I'm reading the 'learning with errors' wiki page and it's beyond my comprehension. There's a weird fear in my mind that…

[deleted]

Re: iMessage with PQ3 Cryptographic Protocol

#186

Post by a1369209993 »

tptacek wrote: post #176
a1369209993 wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's a weird fear in my mind that all these "post quantum algorithms" are so complicated, with such a large surface area, that they may hide flaws. That's correct (emphasis on "may", of course), and is why it's absolutely imperative to always use PQC/ECC hybrid cryptosystems rather than pure PQC. See eg [0] for a more detailed explanation. 0: https://blog.cr.yp.to/20240102-hybrid.html

There are essentially no mainstream systems that don't do this. That's why new systems deploy things like PQ3.

Do you mean:

> There are essentially no mainstream systems that don't [use PQC/ECC hybrid cryptosystems?].

If so, good. I'll admit my expectations are a bit biased from having to deal with projects that go out of their way to produce defective software (eg DRM, malicious abuse of undefined behaviour by compliers, cloudflare and other captcha-walls, etc) so I tend to assume the worst by default.

Re: iMessage with PQ3 Cryptographic Protocol

#187

Post by kevvok »

Retr0id wrote: post #134
andy_xor_andrew wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm way out of my depth in terms of the math here. But my 'software engineer brain' likes the ideal of using the prime factoring problem, because it's so simple to understand, and feels like some kind of universal primitive. "It's easy to multiply but hard to factor." It just seems so intuitive. But I'm reading the 'learning with errors' wiki page and it's beyond my comprehension. There's a weird fear in my mind that…

The explanation in this video is what made it click for me: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K026C5YaB3A

Same here: this video helped me finally understand the basics concepts underlying LWE

Re: iMessage with PQ3 Cryptographic Protocol

#188

Post by modeless »

snowwrestler wrote: post #166
modeless wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "messages in icloud" is end to end encrypted, and enabling it disables messages for being included in icloud backup. This is misleading at best. Careful reading of Apple's disclosures reveals that the "messages in iCloud" encryption keys are still included in iCloud backups, giving Apple the capability to decrypt your messages on demand for law enforcement or for any other reason of their choosing. The messages may…

Just a bit lower on the same page: > When iCloud Backup is turned on, everything inside it is end-to-end encrypted, including the Messages in iCloud encryption key. Meaning that Apple does not actually have access to that key, because it is encrypted before being saved to their servers.

This is misleading, again. The paragraph you quoted only applies with optional "Advanced Data Protection". Advanced Data Protection is off by default. In the default state Apple does have access to the Messages in iCloud keys in iCloud Backup, as I said.

Re: iMessage with PQ3 Cryptographic Protocol

#189

Post by _khhm »

jwells89 wrote: post #79
yesimahuman wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me, Signal is so much better for my friend or work group chats. My friends are on a mix of devices and platforms, and Signal is a lot nicer for embedded media sharing. And the auto disappearing feature is a must!

The main things holding back Signal usage in my case is practically nobody in my social circle using it and the desktop client not being as nice as that of Messages or Telegram, the latter being particularly relevant for myself and contacts who primarily message with their computers rather than their phones.

Signal UX is AWFUL if you have a work PC, a home PC, a phone, and a tablet.

Getting messages to flow across all of them is impossible.

Re: iMessage with PQ3 Cryptographic Protocol

#190

Post by nicolas_17 »

pavon wrote: post #131
godelski wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like time to become an evangelist then. I had to do this in my group and other than security a major benefit is just that getting potatos instead of pictures has significantly declined. Here's my advice: don't sell security as the foremost feature. Sell it as "iMessage, but for everyone." You got stickers, reactions, high quality videos and images. Then mention security, it is the cherry on top.

Every single person I converted to using Signal stopped using it when SMS support was removed. HN tends to be a younger crowd whose peers cycled through a number of social-networking and messaging apps as popularity waxed and waned. But older generations don't see any compelling reason why they should bother splitting their conversations over multiple apps, when literally everyone with a mobile has texting. Being a d…

Are you from the USA?

I don't like splitting my conversations over multiple apps when literally everyone with a mobile in Argentina has WhatsApp. SMS costs money and having it in the same app as a free messaging platform sounds risky :P

Post reply on HN