3 ms·
> Don't think Apple wouldn't do the same. Of course Apple offers a similar feature. I know lots of people here are going to argue you should never share the ke
by giobox 9mo ago
> Don't think Apple wouldn't do the same.
Of course Apple offers a similar feature. I know lots of people here are going to argue you should never share the key with a third party, but if Apple and Microsoft didn't offer key escrow they would be inundated with requests from ordinary users to unlock computers they have lost the key for. The average user does not understand the security model and is rarely going to store a recovery key at all, let alone safely.
> https://support.apple.com/en-om/guide/mac-help/mh35881/mac https://support.apple.com/en-om/guide/mac-help/mh35881/mac
Apple will escrow the key to allow decryption of the drive with your iCloud account if you want, much like Microsoft will optionally escrow your BitLocker drive encryption key with the equivalent Microsoft account feature. If I recall correctly it's the default option for FileVault on a new Mac too.
- tokyobreakfast 9mo agoThat's what I said. I admit the double-negative grammar is a bit confusing.
- ezfe 9mo agoApple's solution is iCloud Keychain which is E2E encrypted, so would not be revealed with a court order.
- tokyobreakfast 9mo agoWhat is your proof they don't have a duplicate key that also unlocks it? A firm handshake from Tim?
- otterley 9mo agoIf they say they don't, and they do, then that's fraud, and they could be held liable for any damages that result. And, if word got out that they were defrauding customers, that would result in serious reputational damage to Apple (who uses their security practices as an industry differentiator) and possibly a significant customer shift away from them. They don't want that.
- tokyobreakfast 9mo agoAbsent the source code, it's incredibly difficult to disprove when the only proof you have is good vibes.
- otterley 9mo agoThere are many things you can't prove or disprove in this world. That's where trust and reputation comes in - to fill the uncertainty gap.
- fsflover 9mo agoYou mean, trust and reputation of Apple? They're not exactly high: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46252114 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46252114 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45520407 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45520407 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42014588 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42014588 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26644216 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26644216
- otterley 9mo agoAt the end of the day, it's all about how you weigh the evidence. If those examples are sufficient to tip the scales for you, that's your choice. However, Apple's overall trustworthiness--particular when it comes to protecting people's sensitive data--remains high for in the market. Even the examples you posted aren't especially pertinent to that (except for iCloud Keychain, where the complaint isn't whether Apple is securely storing it, but the fact that it got transmitted to them in the first place, and there exists some unresolved ambiguity about whether it is appropriately deleted on demand).
- ezfe 9mo agoNone of these really match the scenario we're discussing here. Some are typical big company stuff, some are technical edge cases, but none are "Apple lies about a fundamental security practice consistently and with malice"
- eddyg 9mo agoYou should watch the whole BlackHat talk (from 2016!) from Apple's Head of Security Engineering and Architecture, but especially this part: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLGFriOKz6U&t=1993s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLGFriOKz6U&t=1993s
- PlatoIsADisease 9mo agoLot of trust in the words that cannot be verified.
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- jcalvinowens 9mo ago> Apple's solution is iCloud Keychain which is E2E encrypted, so would not be revealed with a court order. Nope. For this threat model, E2E is a complete joke when both E's are controlled by the third party. Apple could be compelled by the government to insert code in the client to upload your decrypted data to another endpoint they control, and you'd never know.
- dcrazy 9mo agoThat was tested in the San Bernardino shooter case. Apple stood up and the FBI backed down.
- jcalvinowens 9mo agoIt's incredibly naive to believe apple will continue to be able to do that.
- ezfe 9mo agoYeah and Microsoft could insert code to upload the bitlocker keys. What's your point? Even linux could do that if they were compelled to.
- jcalvinowens 9mo ago> Even linux could do that if they were compelled to. An open source project absolutely cannot do that without your consent if you build your client from the source. That's my point.
- ezfe 9mo agoWait I'm sorry do you build linux from source and review all code changes?
- jcalvinowens 9mo agoYou missed the important part: > For this threat model We're talking about a hypothetical scenario where a state actor getting the information encrypted by the E2E encryption puts your life or freedom in danger. If that's you, yes, you absolutely shouldn't trust US corporations, and you should absolutely be auditing the source code. I seriously doubt that's you though, and it's certainly not me. The sub-title from the original forbes article (linked in the first paragraph of TFA): > But companies like Apple and Meta set up their systems so such a privacy violation isn’t possible. ...is completely utterly false. The journalist swallowed the marketing whole.