I didn't follow this story beyond reading Google's deep dive on the bugs. So I'm curious about a few things. (Deep Dive: https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.co

I didn't follow this story beyond reading Google's deep dive on the bugs. So I'm curious about a few things. (Deep Dive: https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2019/08/a-very-deep-dive-into-ios-exploit.html https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2019/08/a-very-deep-d...) The deep dive actively avoided mentioning information on who the targetted group(s) were. Was it later revealed who the targeted demographic was? Or did Apple just now reveal that information in this statement? It's a rather big piece of the puzzle. This attack being orchestrated by a nation-state was a strong possibility. Knowing that it was a targeted attack against the Uighur makes that case significantly stronger, and adds even darker tones to the story. And then there's this bit from Apple's statement: > all evidence indicates that these website attacks were only operational for a brief period, roughly two months, not “two years” as Google implies Interesting. So I re-checked Google's post and: > This indicated a group making a sustained effort to hack the users of iPhones in certain communities over a period of at least two years. A week ago, I read that to mean that these exploits were being actively used for two years. Reading it today ... it still reads the same to me. I guess what it is actually supposed to say is that the exploits were developed over the course of two years; not that they were actively used for two years. So that's definitely poor wording on Google's part. I wouldn't say it's nefariously worded, though. I think the author of the blog post was just trying to drive home the sophistication of the malicious group. But I know that I certainly came away from Google's article thinking that the exploits were _active_ for two years, which is significantly more frightening. So it makes sense that Apple would want to rebut that point.