6 ms·

And where is that? Like he said, any back door for the good guys is a back door for the bad guys as well.

sigmar 11y ago
back door for the good guys? you mean being able to execute unsigned code? If apple is ever compelled by the government to not allow a certain app (if they lose in the FISA courts) or if the leadership of apple changes? Stories like this could be just the beginning: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/sep/30/apple-removing-drone-strikes-app http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/sep/30/apple-remo...
aianus 11y ago
My Galaxy S3 let me flash whatever I wanted on it. Just had to reboot in a special mode and click a button agreeing to void my warranty. No back door required. Why can't iPhones do the same (from a security perspective, I understand the business reasons)?
- martingordon 11y ago
  I'm saying that the flashing/side-loading is the back door. A malicious actor with physical access to your phone (think screen repair shop, TSA agent, etc) could flash a compromised OS or install malware on your device. Also, there a lot of not-savvy people who will follow instructions in a well-crafted email or pop up and allow themselves to succumb to spyware and malware.
  - vezzy-fnord 11y ago
    I'm saying that the flashing/side-loading is the back door Next you'll be saying compilers are backdoors, too. That's not what the term "backdoor" means. A malicious actor with physical access to your phone Stop. Physical access means all bets are off.
    - martingordon 11y ago
      I should have been more clear. I was using Tim Cook's statement as an analogy for flashing/side-loading. Allowing good guys to do it means bad guys can do it too. Tricking a user into side-loading malware does not require physical access to the device and is relatively common on the Android side (more so on third-party stores).
      - bestnameever 11y ago
        My last few Android phones have wiped themselves before allowing me in a state where I could flash a modified version of android.
  - kbenson 11y ago
    Well, it's a good thing we have Apple's track-record to show us it's impossible to break out of these walled gardens, otherwise we'd really be in trouble if someone got physical access to our phones. https://www.theiphonewiki.com/wiki/Jailbreak https://www.theiphonewiki.com/wiki/Jailbreak
    - martingordon 11y ago
      Fair enough. I used to keep up with jailbreaks way back before I started buying unlocked phones and had read about difficult-to-crack OS versions (and the as-of-yet unjailbreakable 3rd generation Apple TV), but I wasn't aware that it was still this pervasive.
    - muddi900 11y ago
      While I hate the economic stifling of tech innovation that is the App Store culture, I would like to point out that Jailbroken iphone were used by the Chinese government to target protesters in Hong Kong quite recently.
      - kbenson 11y ago
        My point is that stating that side-loading is a back-door that can be abused when your phone is in someone else's possession ends up not being a very good argument when that actually ends up being the harder way to accomplish getting software onto the phone, considering side-loading is both password protected (if your phone is) and still doesn't expose functionality beyond what the OS allows (unlike jail-breaking).
  - lern_too_spel 11y ago
    The device clears user storage before allowing you to flash a new OS, so that isn't an effective way to compromise a user's data. Application installation requires unlocking the device, so the ability to sideload doesn't give an attacker any meaningful ability over installing from an unscanned app store like Apple's.
    - muddi900 11y ago
      The device is wiped of profile data and logins. You files are intact and accessible through a file explorer. It is a very restricted and time consuming method to access a device.
qyv 11y ago
> And where is that? To censorship[1]. [1]: http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/33280133/apple-removes-games-featuring-the-confederate-flag-from-app-store http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/33280133/apple-removes...
pdkl95 11y ago
Accepting the risk that other people might misbehave is price of freedom. Do you want a General Purpose Computer? Or do you want an appliance that is ultimately controlled by someone else, where you have to get permission[1] if you want to use it in any way that wasn't pre-aproved? What are the odds that the things you want to do will continue to be approved when you ask for permission next year? Or ten years from now? If someone can restrict how you use your device, you then they are de facto the actual owner of the device. Do you want to own the products[2] you buy, or do you want a future where property rights are rare and you have to lease everything? The War On General Purpose Computing continues, and the people that wish the Turing machine could be stuffed back in its bottle have been wining small but important battles over the last few years. Apple deserves a lot of blame here, as the walled garden was previously limited to stuff like game consoles, but the the big problem has been the many developers that chose shiny tech, promises of easy development, end-user convenience, and short-term profit over the freedom to tinker with products you actually own. Of course there will be costs and risks. Fighting this trend toward walled gardens, like any war, will probably require certain sacrifices. I suggest paying those costs now, as price of freedom will only increase. [1] https://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/digital-imprimatur/ https://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/digital-imprimatur/ (note: this is originally about publication, but the ideas apply similarly to the War On General Purpose Computing. Also, consider when the essay was written; some technology has changed, but the basic idea is still important) [2] Many products, not just your "phone" (portable computer). Just look at the rush to throw a CPU and 802.11 PHY into absolutely everything. There are many example, but the current attempt by John Deere ( http://ifixit.org/blog/7192/john-deere-mess/ http://ifixit.org/blog/7192/john-deere-mess/ ) to circumvent the "first-sale doctrine" is a perfect example of what is going to happen to most products if we give up ownership.
- pyre 11y ago
  Show me a way to prevent people from getting viruses and malware that doesn't involve the equivalent of requiring everyone to know how to service the entire engine on their car by themselves.
  - pdkl95 11y ago

back door for the good guys? you mean being able to execute unsigned code? If apple is ever compelled by the government to not allow a certain app (if they lose in the FISA courts) or if the leadership of apple changes? Stories like this could be just the beginning: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/sep/30/apple-removing-drone-strikes-app http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/sep/30/apple-remo...

aianus 11y ago

My Galaxy S3 let me flash whatever I wanted on it. Just had to reboot in a special mode and click a button agreeing to void my warranty. No back door required. Why can't iPhones do the same (from a security perspective, I understand the business reasons)?

martingordon 11y ago
I'm saying that the flashing/side-loading is the back door. A malicious actor with physical access to your phone (think screen repair shop, TSA agent, etc) could flash a compromised OS or install malware on your device. Also, there a lot of not-savvy people who will follow instructions in a well-crafted email or pop up and allow themselves to succumb to spyware and malware.
- vezzy-fnord 11y ago
  I'm saying that the flashing/side-loading is the back door Next you'll be saying compilers are backdoors, too. That's not what the term "backdoor" means. A malicious actor with physical access to your phone Stop. Physical access means all bets are off.
  - martingordon 11y ago
    I should have been more clear. I was using Tim Cook's statement as an analogy for flashing/side-loading. Allowing good guys to do it means bad guys can do it too. Tricking a user into side-loading malware does not require physical access to the device and is relatively common on the Android side (more so on third-party stores).
    - bestnameever 11y ago
      My last few Android phones have wiped themselves before allowing me in a state where I could flash a modified version of android.
- kbenson 11y ago
  Well, it's a good thing we have Apple's track-record to show us it's impossible to break out of these walled gardens, otherwise we'd really be in trouble if someone got physical access to our phones. https://www.theiphonewiki.com/wiki/Jailbreak https://www.theiphonewiki.com/wiki/Jailbreak
  - martingordon 11y ago
    Fair enough. I used to keep up with jailbreaks way back before I started buying unlocked phones and had read about difficult-to-crack OS versions (and the as-of-yet unjailbreakable 3rd generation Apple TV), but I wasn't aware that it was still this pervasive.
  - muddi900 11y ago
    While I hate the economic stifling of tech innovation that is the App Store culture, I would like to point out that Jailbroken iphone were used by the Chinese government to target protesters in Hong Kong quite recently.
    - kbenson 11y ago
      My point is that stating that side-loading is a back-door that can be abused when your phone is in someone else's possession ends up not being a very good argument when that actually ends up being the harder way to accomplish getting software onto the phone, considering side-loading is both password protected (if your phone is) and still doesn't expose functionality beyond what the OS allows (unlike jail-breaking).
- lern_too_spel 11y ago
  The device clears user storage before allowing you to flash a new OS, so that isn't an effective way to compromise a user's data. Application installation requires unlocking the device, so the ability to sideload doesn't give an attacker any meaningful ability over installing from an unscanned app store like Apple's.
  - muddi900 11y ago
    The device is wiped of profile data and logins. You files are intact and accessible through a file explorer. It is a very restricted and time consuming method to access a device.

qyv 11y ago

> And where is that? To censorship[1]. [1]: http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/33280133/apple-removes-games-featuring-the-confederate-flag-from-app-store http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/33280133/apple-removes...

pdkl95 11y ago

Accepting the risk that other people might misbehave is price of freedom. Do you want a General Purpose Computer? Or do you want an appliance that is ultimately controlled by someone else, where you have to get permission[1] if you want to use it in any way that wasn't pre-aproved? What are the odds that the things you want to do will continue to be approved when you ask for permission next year? Or ten years from now? If someone can restrict how you use your device, you then they are de facto the actual owner of the device. Do you want to own the products[2] you buy, or do you want a future where property rights are rare and you have to lease everything? The War On General Purpose Computing continues, and the people that wish the Turing machine could be stuffed back in its bottle have been wining small but important battles over the last few years. Apple deserves a lot of blame here, as the walled garden was previously limited to stuff like game consoles, but the the big problem has been the many developers that chose shiny tech, promises of easy development, end-user convenience, and short-term profit over the freedom to tinker with products you actually own. Of course there will be costs and risks. Fighting this trend toward walled gardens, like any war, will probably require certain sacrifices. I suggest paying those costs now, as price of freedom will only increase. [1] https://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/digital-imprimatur/ https://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/digital-imprimatur/ (note: this is originally about publication, but the ideas apply similarly to the War On General Purpose Computing. Also, consider when the essay was written; some technology has changed, but the basic idea is still important) [2] Many products, not just your "phone" (portable computer). Just look at the rush to throw a CPU and 802.11 PHY into absolutely everything. There are many example, but the current attempt by John Deere ( http://ifixit.org/blog/7192/john-deere-mess/ http://ifixit.org/blog/7192/john-deere-mess/ ) to circumvent the "first-sale doctrine" is a perfect example of what is going to happen to most products if we give up ownership.

pyre 11y ago
Show me a way to prevent people from getting viruses and malware that doesn't involve the equivalent of requiring everyone to know how to service the entire engine on their car by themselves.
- pdkl95 11y ago