3 ms·
The point is that Apple couldn't possibly be requiring some hardware backed signature (i.e. HW attestation that this is a genuine Apple product) for iMessage if
by sweetjuly 3y ago
The point is that Apple couldn't possibly be requiring some hardware backed signature (i.e. HW attestation that this is a genuine Apple product) for iMessage if Hackintoshes can pull it off. In so far as Hackintoshes can send iMessages without any sketchy middle-end servers, so too could Android devices if someone were able to reverse engineer enough of the stack.
- fomine3 3y agoIsn't it like a emulated TPM? It may or may not secure, but it works as a TPM.
- gruez 3y agoApple does not use TPMs. They use their own proprietary security chips, which approximates TPMs. I'm not sure how their implementation works, but even for TPMs "emulated TPM" won't work because real TPMs have endorsement keys[1] with accompanying certificates signed by the manufacturer. If apple really wanted to, they could check against such key, which would theoretically block non-genuine devices. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_Computing#Endorsement_key https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_Computing#Endorsement_...
- iAMkenough 3y agoFor Hackintosh purposes, the security chip doesn't come into play, at least not yet. There are still Macs supported by the latest macOS that don't require a T1 or T2 security chip.
- duskwuff 3y agoNo. The only Apple-specific hardware information that Apple services like iMessage require is a couple of hardware serial numbers; Hackintosh systems just make one up. https://dortania.github.io/OpenCore-Post-Install/universal/iservices.html https://dortania.github.io/OpenCore-Post-Install/universal/i...