8 ms·

Since apple has no control over your fire extinguisher, they sent a man to securely take it from your house and dispose of it. It could have been a bomb for all

by maxlin 3y ago

Since apple has no control over your fire extinguisher, they sent a man to securely take it from your house and dispose of it. It could have been a bomb for all you know.

vosper 3y ago
Except that the iMessage system belongs to Apple, not to you > The app doesn’t connect to any servers at Beeper itself, only to Apple servers, the way a “real” iMessage text would. https://techcrunch.com/2023/12/05/beeper-reversed-engineered-imessage-to-bring-blue-bubble-texts-to-android-users/ https://techcrunch.com/2023/12/05/beeper-reversed-engineered...
georgespencer 3y ago
Do you really consider Apple's control over a proprietary protocol which they invented and maintain to be comparable to a scenario in which Apple "sends a man" to take "your fire extinguisher […] from your house"? I've re-written this comment five or six times in an attempt to find the most charitable interpretation, but I just cannot comprehend how it made it through your filter and out onto the internet.
- iAMkenough 3y ago
  There's an open standard they're refusing to adopt that would be more secure than forcing users back to SMS.
  - Hamuko 3y ago
    Are you referring to the one that they're adopting?
  - georgespencer 3y ago
    Apple is adopting RCS, but as far as I can tell your reply has nothing whatsoever to do with my comment.
  - kamilner 3y ago
    If you mean RCS, end-to-end encryption is not part of the standard, it is a non-standard extension supported only by the google messages app https://support.google.com/messages/answer/10262381?hl=en https://support.google.com/messages/answer/10262381?hl=en
    - Rebelgecko 3y ago
      Does RCS need E2E to be better than SMS when it comes to privacy/security?
      - llm_nerd 3y ago
        Yes, it does. RCS without E2E is following the SMS model and putting your telco in charge. It uses transport encryption but that is basically meaningless when every relay sees the entire contents of the message.
        Rebelgecko 3y ago
        Does that mean Stingrays and just regular old SDRs can still pick up RCS messages?
        llm_nerd 3y ago
        RCS uses transport encryption and I honestly have no idea if it uses cert pinning or server certs or the like. The bigger concern to me is that it puts your telco in charge, just like the old days of SMS. Without E2E they get to see all of the contents of messages and to share it with whoever they deem they want to share it with, which history has shown is too many people. Telcos were very willing partners in the development of RCS for a reason. And there's a reason the base spec doesn't include E2E. Telcos want a return to the good old days. SMS is insecure and no one should use it. RCS isn't that much better and history is a lesson that it returns to a partner that isn't trustworthy.
      - NavinF 3y ago
        Yeah anything that's not E2E encrypted is pretty useless for privacy/security these days. Might as well just use DMs on reddit, twitter, etc if you don't care about E2E
- zem 3y ago
  i am just flabbergasted that we are living in a timeline where the phrase "proprietary protocol" is a real thing
  - NavinF 3y ago
    Aren't most protocols proprietary? Every app builds their own on top of standard protocols like HTTP, TLS, and IP. Not all services are hostile to third party clients though
    - zem 3y ago
      well, there's proprietary in the sense of "not a standard" and proprietary in the sense of "no one else can make software that uses this protocol". the latter is very weird if you think about it.
      - NavinF 3y ago
        Eh not really that weird. Consider how Microsoft repeatedly reverse engineered AOL for compatibility reasons and AOL actively blocked their efforts with every update: https://youtu.be/w-7PjunSxLU https://youtu.be/w-7PjunSxLU Stuff like this happens all the time and the internet has always been like this. I'm sure older users will remember even older examples
- maxlin 3y ago
  It's not a super serious comment, it's more about how ridiculous the tone of "We are doing this for YOUR protection" would be. On a more serious note though, in the end Apple absolutely has the power of increasing everyone's capability and security by doing something like setting up a playbook of how iMessage could just use Signal protocol and how other actors could join in, or really anything else but doing this.
  - georgespencer 3y ago
    > It's not a super serious comment, it's more about how ridiculous the tone of "We are doing this for YOUR protection" would be. Right now I can presume a basic level of device security across all iMessage threads I have. Beeper deranges that: E2EE is still there, but Beeper exposes my correspondence to device security weaknesses from other OEMs, malware, keyloggers, screen scrapers, etc. as a result of lax app marketplace security & privacy. It seems to me to be entirely disingenuous to suggest that Beeper increases security: in fact, the opposite is true. > in the end Apple absolutely has the power of increasing everyone's capability and security by doing something like setting up a playbook of how iMessage could just use Signal protocol and how other actors could join in, or really anything else but doing this. I don't see why any company should be denigrated for not helping the users of another competing platform, particularly when doing so likely comes at the cost of increasing the risk to its own users.
    - scatters 3y ago
      Does Apple block imessage on rooted phones? If not, what level of device security do you really have?
      - georgespencer 3y ago
        In addition to explicitly prohibiting it as a violation of the iPhone EULA, Apple goes to extraordinary lengths to close the exploits which allow jailbreaking. Apple doesn't just block iMessage on rooted phones, it tries to prevent jailbreaking outright.
willseth 3y ago
What? Does a fire extinguisher connect to Apple servers? Does a fire extinguisher secretly being a bomb affect the security of others? I don’t know if you could have come up with a worse metaphor.
- cqqxo4zV46cp 3y ago
  [flagged]
- jrflowers 3y ago
  If you think about it, blocking an app and stealing your fire extinguishers are both actions that a person or corporation could theoretically do. Since they are both actions, they are equivalent. Therefore blocking an app, burning down your house, baking a pie, writing a sonnet, doing a backflip are all the same thing.
  - willseth 3y ago
    Ahhh and to think all this time I thought I knew what a metaphor was. It’s literally any comparison! Silly me!
    - jrflowers 3y ago
      It’s spooky. If you think about it if Apple can block an app what is to stop them from breaking into your garage and modifying your car to talk like KITT from Knight Rider but instead of being helpful it makes mean remarks about your clothes that make you cry?? What if Apple filled your refrigerator with concrete? They could build a brick wall in front of your house and paint a replica of the outside on it so you run into it like a looney toon!
      - willseth 3y ago
        Shit. E2EE encrypting my refrigerator brb
    - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
echelon 3y ago
It's time that we as an industry push back against Apple and Google. The smartphone is the single most important device for modern life and society. It's news, photos, communications with loved ones, work, entertainment, food, paying for practically everything... And it's just two companies. Two companies with an iron grip over such a wide and diverse set of functionalities that, taken together, should be as inalienable as free speech. - They control what you can put on the devices (or in the cases where they're open, they scare you or make it exceedingly difficult). - They tax all innovation happening on the platform. Because web is second class. If you build an app, you have to pay for ads against your own brand. You can't have a customer relationship (yet Google and Apple get that). You have to keep up with their release cycles on their timeline. They can deny you or ban you at any point. They take 30% of your margin. You're forced to use their billing. In many cases, they actively develop software that competes with you. - They're extremely user hostile. The devices aren't easily repairable, the batteries force upgrade cycles, and they do stupid things that make your kids want to buy the most expensive model for clout. Green and blue bubbles, etc. - On top of this, they're gradually eating away at every related industry. The music industry. The credit cards and payments and finance industry. The film industry. It's all getting absorbed into the blob that is the locked down smartphone. - They turn their devices into "CSAM detection dragnets" (read: five eyes, US, China, and every other entity that wants to surveil). This is fucking absurd and it needs to stop. We need more than two device and platform manufactures. Apps should be at least one of: (1) portable, (2) freely installable from the web without scare tactics, (3) web should be first class / native The device provider shouldn't be able to use their platform play to maintain dominance. The cost of switching should be zero until there are enough new peer-level competitors. I could keep going... the status quo is a tax on the public, a tax on innovation, and a really overall unfortunate situation.
- fsflover 3y ago
  The alternative phones outside the duopoly exist. Sent from my Librem 5.
  - nvy 3y ago
    Have Purism solved the problem where it will randomly burn through an entire battery charge in an hour? That basically makes it a non-option for the overwhelming majority of people, and it was still an issue 6 months ago. I really want to like the Librem but it's hard to justify the price tag when you're going to have to carry another phone around with you anyway.
cqqxo4zV46cp 3y ago
[flagged]

by maxlin 3y ago

Since apple has no control over your fire extinguisher, they sent a man to securely take it from your house and dispose of it. It could have been a bomb for all you know.

vosper 3y ago

Except that the iMessage system belongs to Apple, not to you > The app doesn’t connect to any servers at Beeper itself, only to Apple servers, the way a “real” iMessage text would. https://techcrunch.com/2023/12/05/beeper-reversed-engineered-imessage-to-bring-blue-bubble-texts-to-android-users/ https://techcrunch.com/2023/12/05/beeper-reversed-engineered...

georgespencer 3y ago

Do you really consider Apple's control over a proprietary protocol which they invented and maintain to be comparable to a scenario in which Apple "sends a man" to take "your fire extinguisher […] from your house"? I've re-written this comment five or six times in an attempt to find the most charitable interpretation, but I just cannot comprehend how it made it through your filter and out onto the internet.

iAMkenough 3y ago
There's an open standard they're refusing to adopt that would be more secure than forcing users back to SMS.
- Hamuko 3y ago
  Are you referring to the one that they're adopting?
- georgespencer 3y ago
  Apple is adopting RCS, but as far as I can tell your reply has nothing whatsoever to do with my comment.
- kamilner 3y ago
  If you mean RCS, end-to-end encryption is not part of the standard, it is a non-standard extension supported only by the google messages app https://support.google.com/messages/answer/10262381?hl=en https://support.google.com/messages/answer/10262381?hl=en
  - Rebelgecko 3y ago
    Does RCS need E2E to be better than SMS when it comes to privacy/security?
    - llm_nerd 3y ago
      Yes, it does. RCS without E2E is following the SMS model and putting your telco in charge. It uses transport encryption but that is basically meaningless when every relay sees the entire contents of the message.
      - Rebelgecko 3y ago
        Does that mean Stingrays and just regular old SDRs can still pick up RCS messages?
        llm_nerd 3y ago
        RCS uses transport encryption and I honestly have no idea if it uses cert pinning or server certs or the like. The bigger concern to me is that it puts your telco in charge, just like the old days of SMS. Without E2E they get to see all of the contents of messages and to share it with whoever they deem they want to share it with, which history has shown is too many people. Telcos were very willing partners in the development of RCS for a reason. And there's a reason the base spec doesn't include E2E. Telcos want a return to the good old days. SMS is insecure and no one should use it. RCS isn't that much better and history is a lesson that it returns to a partner that isn't trustworthy.
    - NavinF 3y ago
      Yeah anything that's not E2E encrypted is pretty useless for privacy/security these days. Might as well just use DMs on reddit, twitter, etc if you don't care about E2E
zem 3y ago
i am just flabbergasted that we are living in a timeline where the phrase "proprietary protocol" is a real thing
- NavinF 3y ago
  Aren't most protocols proprietary? Every app builds their own on top of standard protocols like HTTP, TLS, and IP. Not all services are hostile to third party clients though
  - zem 3y ago
    well, there's proprietary in the sense of "not a standard" and proprietary in the sense of "no one else can make software that uses this protocol". the latter is very weird if you think about it.
    - NavinF 3y ago
      Eh not really that weird. Consider how Microsoft repeatedly reverse engineered AOL for compatibility reasons and AOL actively blocked their efforts with every update: https://youtu.be/w-7PjunSxLU https://youtu.be/w-7PjunSxLU Stuff like this happens all the time and the internet has always been like this. I'm sure older users will remember even older examples
maxlin 3y ago
It's not a super serious comment, it's more about how ridiculous the tone of "We are doing this for YOUR protection" would be. On a more serious note though, in the end Apple absolutely has the power of increasing everyone's capability and security by doing something like setting up a playbook of how iMessage could just use Signal protocol and how other actors could join in, or really anything else but doing this.
- georgespencer 3y ago
  > It's not a super serious comment, it's more about how ridiculous the tone of "We are doing this for YOUR protection" would be. Right now I can presume a basic level of device security across all iMessage threads I have. Beeper deranges that: E2EE is still there, but Beeper exposes my correspondence to device security weaknesses from other OEMs, malware, keyloggers, screen scrapers, etc. as a result of lax app marketplace security & privacy. It seems to me to be entirely disingenuous to suggest that Beeper increases security: in fact, the opposite is true. > in the end Apple absolutely has the power of increasing everyone's capability and security by doing something like setting up a playbook of how iMessage could just use Signal protocol and how other actors could join in, or really anything else but doing this. I don't see why any company should be denigrated for not helping the users of another competing platform, particularly when doing so likely comes at the cost of increasing the risk to its own users.
  - scatters 3y ago
    Does Apple block imessage on rooted phones? If not, what level of device security do you really have?
    - georgespencer 3y ago
      In addition to explicitly prohibiting it as a violation of the iPhone EULA, Apple goes to extraordinary lengths to close the exploits which allow jailbreaking. Apple doesn't just block iMessage on rooted phones, it tries to prevent jailbreaking outright.

willseth 3y ago

What? Does a fire extinguisher connect to Apple servers? Does a fire extinguisher secretly being a bomb affect the security of others? I don’t know if you could have come up with a worse metaphor.

cqqxo4zV46cp 3y ago
[flagged]
jrflowers 3y ago
If you think about it, blocking an app and stealing your fire extinguishers are both actions that a person or corporation could theoretically do. Since they are both actions, they are equivalent. Therefore blocking an app, burning down your house, baking a pie, writing a sonnet, doing a backflip are all the same thing.
- willseth 3y ago
  Ahhh and to think all this time I thought I knew what a metaphor was. It’s literally any comparison! Silly me!
  - jrflowers 3y ago
    It’s spooky. If you think about it if Apple can block an app what is to stop them from breaking into your garage and modifying your car to talk like KITT from Knight Rider but instead of being helpful it makes mean remarks about your clothes that make you cry?? What if Apple filled your refrigerator with concrete? They could build a brick wall in front of your house and paint a replica of the outside on it so you run into it like a looney toon!
    - willseth 3y ago
      Shit. E2EE encrypting my refrigerator brb
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago

echelon 3y ago

It's time that we as an industry push back against Apple and Google. The smartphone is the single most important device for modern life and society. It's news, photos, communications with loved ones, work, entertainment, food, paying for practically everything... And it's just two companies. Two companies with an iron grip over such a wide and diverse set of functionalities that, taken together, should be as inalienable as free speech. - They control what you can put on the devices (or in the cases where they're open, they scare you or make it exceedingly difficult). - They tax all innovation happening on the platform. Because web is second class. If you build an app, you have to pay for ads against your own brand. You can't have a customer relationship (yet Google and Apple get that). You have to keep up with their release cycles on their timeline. They can deny you or ban you at any point. They take 30% of your margin. You're forced to use their billing. In many cases, they actively develop software that competes with you. - They're extremely user hostile. The devices aren't easily repairable, the batteries force upgrade cycles, and they do stupid things that make your kids want to buy the most expensive model for clout. Green and blue bubbles, etc. - On top of this, they're gradually eating away at every related industry. The music industry. The credit cards and payments and finance industry. The film industry. It's all getting absorbed into the blob that is the locked down smartphone. - They turn their devices into "CSAM detection dragnets" (read: five eyes, US, China, and every other entity that wants to surveil). This is fucking absurd and it needs to stop. We need more than two device and platform manufactures. Apps should be at least one of: (1) portable, (2) freely installable from the web without scare tactics, (3) web should be first class / native The device provider shouldn't be able to use their platform play to maintain dominance. The cost of switching should be zero until there are enough new peer-level competitors. I could keep going... the status quo is a tax on the public, a tax on innovation, and a really overall unfortunate situation.

fsflover 3y ago
The alternative phones outside the duopoly exist. Sent from my Librem 5.
- nvy 3y ago
  Have Purism solved the problem where it will randomly burn through an entire battery charge in an hour? That basically makes it a non-option for the overwhelming majority of people, and it was still an issue 6 months ago. I really want to like the Librem but it's hard to justify the price tag when you're going to have to carry another phone around with you anyway.

cqqxo4zV46cp 3y ago

[flagged]