4 ms·

No, he is right that you are using bad words because you disagree. I wouldn't have added this but the thread just keeps going. Just because someone want to be

by Dah00n 5y ago

No, he is right that you are using bad words because you disagree. I wouldn't have added this but the thread just keeps going. Just because someone want to be as secure as possible while using their electronic devices and you think they are being extreme doesn't mean that they are being paranoid. It has nothing to do with being paranoid. It could simply be because it is fun to try and secure your devices or to gather knowledge on how to do so in case you need to apply the skill-set at work or a thousand other reasons. >you don't trust iMessage to be End-to-End Encrypted I don't secure my devices as GP does but I also do not trust for a second that iMessage is securely E2EE. It is not something you hear rarely if talking about the topic, in fact it is very common argument on HN that iMessage messages are saved unencrypted to iCloud. >this was pulled off in iMessage (more sandboxed than any other messenger security-wise) That is almost the opposite opinion of iMessage than what was posted by researchers yesterday on HN (well, Twitter originally). In fact they stated: >"BlastDoor is a great step, to be sure, but it's pretty lame to just slap sandboxing on iMessage and hope for the best. How about: "don't automatically run extremely complex and buggy parsing on data that strangers push to your phone?!" In short, Paranoid is misused a lot like this. Just like Schizophrenia (it is often used about having multiple personalities or many opinions that clashes, but neither is correct usage).

gjsman-1000 5y ago
> It could simply be because it is fun to try and secure your devices or to gather knowledge on how to do so It could be the case, absolutely. But the OP doesn't sound like their having fun, they are in earnest. > do not trust for a second that iMessage is securely E2EE Ask a security expert, and they will tell you it has been verified by just about everyone who has inspected it that this is, in fact, the case, including the EFF. But it is proprietary code, not open, which is a downfall. > are saved unencrypted to iCloud And can be turned off with the flip of a switch in Settings if that's something you are worried about. For most people who aren't OP-sec (like my Grandma), having all of her messages deleted because someone stole her phone isn't worth it. > "buggy parsing on data that strangers push to your phone?!" Yes... Except that every other secure messenger also does the exact same thing. And they don't have BlastDoor sandboxing like iMessage does. Yes, BlastDoor has flaws, but at least it's there unlike other messengers which don't sandbox.

by Dah00n 5y ago

gjsman-1000 5y ago

> It could simply be because it is fun to try and secure your devices or to gather knowledge on how to do so It could be the case, absolutely. But the OP doesn't sound like their having fun, they are in earnest. > do not trust for a second that iMessage is securely E2EE Ask a security expert, and they will tell you it has been verified by just about everyone who has inspected it that this is, in fact, the case, including the EFF. But it is proprietary code, not open, which is a downfall. > are saved unencrypted to iCloud And can be turned off with the flip of a switch in Settings if that's something you are worried about. For most people who aren't OP-sec (like my Grandma), having all of her messages deleted because someone stole her phone isn't worth it. > "buggy parsing on data that strangers push to your phone?!" Yes... Except that every other secure messenger also does the exact same thing. And they don't have BlastDoor sandboxing like iMessage does. Yes, BlastDoor has flaws, but at least it's there unlike other messengers which don't sandbox.