4 ms·
It's definitely not trivial to do this in a secure way. Every bit of additional code is code that could contain security flaws. Also, looking at how the banks
by pilif 10y ago
It's definitely not trivial to do this in a secure way. Every bit of additional code is code that could contain security flaws.
Also, looking at how the banks are doing over here ("your password can't be longer than 16 characters and can't contain the following symbols: " ' %"), I'm trusting apple more than the banks.
- tmd83 10y agoIt can very well be that Apple is or will design a more secure system than most back. They are after all good at security and one of the largest technology company. But the question here is that there are generic hardware in iPhone that can be used by anybody to make contactless payment good/bad. Apple is not giving them the access not just because of security but to reduce competition. If you don't trust your bank but apple the bank is not forcing you to use their app so that point doesn't really apply. What if Intel/AMD or any processor company was saying the the encoding hardware of their device was only accessible to their own app and not to other application in your device since others wouldn't know how to use it properly?
- caspianm 10y agoHere is a discussion of Intel limiting the code that can run in security subsystems in their processors: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11007060 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11007060 I'm not saying this is acceptable, but it seems to be happening.