9 ms·

Notable highlights for me: > Lockdown Mode is available in iOS 16 and coming soon in iPadOS 16 and macOS Ventura. > Web browsing - Certain complex web technol

• alerighi 4y ago
  > Apple did an amazing job already of hardening iOS by severely restricting which applications can use JIT Well they did that not because they care about users but because they want all software to pass trough the App Store (and thus the review and policies of Apple). If you would allow to run efficiently code from other sources (for example downloaded at runtime, put in a W+X memory page and executed) that code doesn't pass through the review process of Apple, thus one can publish an app that does something and then modify its code to make it do another thing (even load an entirely different thing). In the end I don't think this is a good thing for users.
  • GekkePrutser 4y ago
    Indeed this, it's more about platform control. I really hope the EU will succeed in forcing Apple to allow third party app stores. That would be a game changer. People that are happy to stay in the walled garden can simply not use any other app stores but for someone like me it will open up iOS as an actual option I can choose. Right now there's too many things I can't do on iOS. Though honestly, I'd be even happier with a real third option instead.
    • prox 4y ago
      What do you need iOS to do?
      • withinboredom 4y ago
        I’d like to write an app for myself, side load it, and Apple not have to give me special permission to do what I want. Right now, I have to have a “shortcut” start my own app (for simming) to change some device settings, then remember to change them back after the session. But if Apple would allow you to do whatever you want without their permission (on your own device), my life would be a bit simpler.
• encryptluks2 4y ago
  Chrome and Chromium has flags to disable JIT as well, but there is definitely a significant performance penalty. One area of greatest concern for me is client hints and the various JS APIs that leak way too much, from OS to memory and more. You would think that an extension as popular as uBlock Origin would exist that would make this information as generic as possible to mimic the most common browser profile. Without it, it is still incredibly easy to identify a user with JS enabled and unfortunately disabling JS also makes you unique. This doesn't even address the Canvas API issue that needs to be virtualized to protect privacy. The web standard as a whole hasn't really put a lot of thought into privacy.
• Dylan16807 4y ago
  > which is dangerous as it allocates W+X pages which are often used by the final stage of an exploit Are you sure? There's no need to ever have a page that is W and X at the same time, and I would not expect any current professional JIT to make one.
  • MintPaw 4y ago
    Does the distinction matter? Is changing W pages into X pages meaningfully safer?
    • bpye 4y ago
      Yes. It means that you can’t use a write primitive to simply modify an already executable page.
      • lisper 4y ago
        How does that help?
        • remexre 4y ago
          It means an attacker with an arbitrary-write vuln needs to be able to target a page as the JITted code is being written to it, rather than being able to target any existing page with code in it.
          • Dylan16807 4y ago
            And since javascript is so focused on a single thread, it's easy to make sure it's not even running at the same time your JIT code is doing those writes.
    • 0x457 4y ago
      It depends on the kind of vulnerability. Say you have a vulnerability that allows writing to arbitrary pages, then an attacker on RWX system can write malicious code into pages that would get executed. In W^X environment, the attacker needs to find a W page and write to it before it becomes the X page. This isn't a 100% mitigation, but it does make it harder to exploit. JavaScript JIT been source of so many RCE vulnerabilities.
• mataug 4y ago
  > Overall it's very interesting to see Apple invest so significantly in something that will benefit relatively few users -- not that I'm complaining! My theory on this is that apple is one of the few companies where everything they build seems to be well integrated into their ecosystem. This is part of their appeal. Another part of Apple's appeal is that they've positioned themselves to appear as the company that cares the most about consumer privacy and security. Lockdown mode seems to be one of those features that's great for marketing and PR in certain circles, while being extremely useful in situations where it's needed. I imagine someone writing an article claiming how lockdown mode saved them, and that's practically free viral marketing in the security circles.
  • t0mas88 4y ago
    Same for Tesla's Bioweapon Defense Mode. Nearly nobody ever needs it but it gets them some low cost marketing / viral clicks.
    • SV_BubbleTime 4y ago
      Different take… Apple is going to push the idea wider and this is their test audience. It wouldn’t surprise me if the anti-googled, that is instead of enforcing adoption of a web technology because they own the browser market, stopping all the misused technologies they don’t want to have to explicitly protect for.
      • mensetmanusman 4y ago
        Exactly, this is a business move to stop competitive advertising while they sell their own.
    • optimiz3 4y ago
      > Bioweapon Defense Mode. Nearly nobody ever needs it Raging wildfires causing smog all over the west coast beg to differ. Having built-in HEPA filtration is fantastic.
    • KennyBlanken 4y ago
• unethical_ban 4y ago
  >Overall it's very interesting to see Apple invest so significantly in something that will benefit relatively few users -- not that I'm complaining! I would say that this is at the very least a strong marketing point. "We are secure by default, and the most secure phone out-of-the-box on the planet if needed". The hardware itself must be trusted to an extent, too. Is there an android-compatible device/ROM combination that can advertise the same level of security as this lockdown mode, without spending two days configuring it?
  • saagarjha 4y ago
    Pixel with one of the security-focused ROMs, maybe?
  • koen_hendriks 4y ago
    Google has advanced protection [1] which also extends into Android [2]. Setup is easy and fast. In no way is this 'revolutionary' by Apple. [1] https://landing.google.com/advancedprotection/ https://landing.google.com/advancedprotection/ [2] https://support.google.com/accounts/answer/9764949?hl=en https://support.google.com/accounts/answer/9764949?hl=en
  • fsflover 4y ago
    Not Android-compatible, but: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19360189 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19360189
  • PartiallyTyped 4y ago
    My bet is that long-term, apple will build manufacturing in the US and Europe explicitly, and target government contracts for phones for officials. A phone fully designed, developed, and assembled in the States with capacity to further lock down is a huge + for three letter agencies.
    • astrange 4y ago
      It's more or less impossible to do this. American workers on the Mac Pro line can't even screw in screws correctly.
• lancebeet 4y ago
  >Overall it's very interesting to see Apple invest so significantly in something that will benefit relatively few users -- not that I'm complaining! Getting world leaders, celebrities and CEOs to use their devices might make this part of their marketing budget.
  • 1f60c 4y ago
    I think the primary user base will be human rights activists and journalists, similar to Google’s Advanced Protection Program.
    • GuB-42 4y ago
      I don't think human right activists and journalists are the most at risk here. They are more at risk than you and me but at least, they can keep a low profile. CEOs and celebrities and politicians are not only at risk because of their influence and insider knowledge, but they also have a huge target painted on them at all times. They simply can't keep a low profile due to their occupation. They also have money, much more than journalists and activists, so they attract "regular" criminals too. Human right activists and journalists probably won't be their main user base but it will be the most prominent for public relations reasons, because who doesn't like human right and investigative journalism? VIPs are less marketable and let's not talk about criminals. To keep things clear, I think it is a good feature, even if it can help criminals. After all, human right activists are often technically criminals where they act.
      • jsjohnst 4y ago
        > targets human rights defenders, journalists, and dissidents It’s literally spelled out as one of the target audiences in Apple’s press release announcing the feature.
        • onedognight 4y ago
          I have yet to hear about NSO tools being used to target celebrities who are not activists. Activists are targeted all the time. For example, Mexico used its NSO install to target a person that was working to get a tax on sugar sweetened beverages passed. And their children! https://deibert.citizenlab.ca/2017/02/mexico-nso-group-and-the-soda-tax/ https://deibert.citizenlab.ca/2017/02/mexico-nso-group-and-t...
• sneak 4y ago
  > Overall it's very interesting to see Apple invest so significantly in something that will benefit relatively few users Apple has been doing this for decades with heavy investment into assistive technology, far better than other platforms.
  • prox 4y ago
    Looking at you Google. The only things they make is to spy more
    • withinboredom 4y ago
      Apple isn’t much better. They just have better marketing.
      • nr2x 4y ago
        Marginally better privacy, waaaaaaay better marketing. Which is funny because google is the advertising company.
        • Melatonic 4y ago
          Google has great advertising - they are just not marketing TO you like Apple is :-D
          • nr2x 4y ago
            very good point!
        • withinboredom 4y ago
          I mean, to be fair, Google grew up just trying to get us to click on things. Apple had to convince people to part with sums of money for lumps of metal and plastic with lightning in them. Apple probably had a bigger budget for that sort of thing from the beginning, thus creating a proper culture. Google, probably not so much.
    • 4y ago
• gonehome 4y ago
  I suspect this is a direct response to the NSO Group related hacks.
  • MBCook 4y ago
    I hadn’t thought of that but it’s an excellent observation and would make perfect sense. Outside of that it’s kind of left-field and out of character for them to give users a way to make things work worse.
  • jsjohnst 4y ago
    Considering NSO Group is specifically mentioned by name multiple times in Apple’s press release announcing Lockdown Mode, I’d say you’re right… > Lockdown Mode offers an extreme, optional level of security for the very few users who, because of who they are or what they do, may be personally targeted by some of the most sophisticated digital threats, such as those from NSO Group and other private companies developing state-sponsored mercenary spyware.
• jchw 4y ago
  > Apple did an amazing job already of hardening iOS by severely restricting which applications can use JIT (and this is their justification for why non-Safari browser engines are not allowed on iOS) I think it's probably inaccurate to conflate these two things: the JIT was not even allowed in third party browsers when using Safari for a long time, and they still didn't allow other browser engines. If this was the only reason, surely other browser engines without JIT would be fine?
  • derefr 4y ago
    Any Turing-complete interpreter written in a non-memory-safe language is a potential exploit vector; and browsers are full of them. The major browser engines all do their own font rendering, for just one example. This is why the iOS App Store allows Swift Playgrounds (app with a memory-safe interpreter), and allows iSH Shell (virtualized POSIX environment, where you can write and run e.g. bash scripts), but doesn't allow iSH Shell to ship with gcc.
    • Sirened 4y ago
      fwiw swift playgrounds actually does have an entitlement [1] which lets in run self-signed code [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22632692 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22632692
    • kccqzy 4y ago
      > but doesn't allow iSH Shell to ship with gcc. That's just a business requirement on the App Store rather than a technical requirement. Nothing prevents you from installing iSH shell and then installing gcc yourself afterwards. In fact I have done so. To summarize, Apple made a speed bump, not a wall.
    • saagarjha 4y ago
      iSH doesn’t ship with GCC because it is massive, not because Apple blocks it. In fact it would probably be easier for us to include it rather than deal with making the package available to be reviewed.
• derefr 4y ago
  > Overall it's very interesting to see Apple invest so significantly in something that will benefit relatively few users Maybe Apple wants to encourage more (non-classified) government use of iPhones? Maybe they have a big juicy contract they could take if they just get their OS into the right shape for it? Government purchase-orders used to be the main thing that kept RIM/Blackberry afloat: they were a Canadian manufacturer, and so were (or could be validated + closely scrutinized to be) trustworthy as a supplier for American government communications systems. This is 90% of why the Blackberry ecosystem was... the way that it was. Apple is now in (nearly) the same position. And their ecosystem has also been strange for the last 6-or-so years, in that particular "there's no clear reason for this, unless the government asked you to do it for supply-chain-integrity purposes" way (e.g. a self-serve repair program that requires you to pre-register a device for repair before ordering parts, and then report the part IDs to initiate online pairing.)
  • Spooky23 4y ago
    Apple owns this market. They really are BlackBerry. The niche they don’t play in is some police, inspector, and other outdoor jobs. The iPhone environmental operating range is too narrow.
• SanjayMehta 4y ago
  Remember when Tim Cook said he didn't care about the ROI when Apple spent millions making their devices more accessible? Lockdown mode is quite similar in that thinking. https://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/tim-cook-soundly-rejects-politics-of-the-ncppr-suggests-group-sell-apples-s https://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/tim-cook-soundly-rej...
  • divbzero 4y ago
    During Apple’s annual meeting an activist asked Tim Cook to commit to doing only those things that are profitable. To which he responded: “When we work on making our devices accessible by the blind, I don’t consider the bloody ROI.”
    • Red_Leaves_Flyy 4y ago
      >commit to doing only those things that are profitable People that think like this are a danger to humanity.
• matchagaucho 4y ago
  It reads like a US Government RFP response to me. Perhaps requested by Biden's Director of InfoSec?