> It's the same never-ending war as anti-cheat vs cheat. Building secure software and building anti-cheat are nothing alike. Anti-cheat is fundamentally impos

> It's the same never-ending war as anti-cheat vs cheat. Building secure software and building anti-cheat are nothing alike. Anti-cheat is fundamentally impossible (on a true general purpose computer) because you’re building software that has to run in an environment where it can be dissected and modified. Building a secure device (something which has to satisfy certain security properties for all inputs through a constrained API) is fundamentally possible. We’re just too lazy and cheap to do it. I don’t even think it’s “ridiculously hard” - we would just have to spend more money on correct by construction designs, formal methods, etc instead of spending money on flashy UIs and random features no one cares about. The number of employees at Apple working on security is vanishingly small compared to the number of employees, say, working on random siri features. And the way they approach security in many apps is also wrong. Instead of having people with formal correctness backgrounds designing the APIs against which apps are built, they just have developers with no security background putting everything together and then have a few security people trying to pick up the pieces.