It's not as far fetched as you think - there's a documentary movie made about this true story...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Says iMessage Interception Would Require Re-Engineering Systems, Has No Interest in Doing So
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's not as far fetched as you think - there's a documentary movie made about this true story...
so basically from my understanding of the information given by the tester/researcher is that apple (the ones who programed iMessage) has the ability to decode their own program to read the information that is passed through it. how is this not a surprise.
of course apple could possibly re program iMessage so they could read your stuff. they created the device that we use. thats like saying facebook does not have the ability to read our stuff because we set it to private.
of course apple could possibly re program iMessage so they could read your stuff. they created the device that we use. thats like saying facebook does not have the ability to read our stuff because we set it to private.
As I see it ...
So the situation we have here is that law enforcement has said they can't access our iMessages directly. Apple has stated that they can't either (so don't ask them to). Some researcher says wait a minute, you can access them if you do this. Law enforcement says to Apple you can read the messages, researcher says so. Hand over the messages.
Thank you researcher, you have succeeded in making me less secure.
So the situation we have here is that law enforcement has said they can't access our iMessages directly. Apple has stated that they can't either (so don't ask them to). Some researcher says wait a minute, you can access them if you do this. Law enforcement says to Apple you can read the messages, researcher says so. Hand over the messages.
Thank you researcher, you have succeeded in making me less secure.
But, that is simply *not* the case...ideally, your online transactions should be safe and secure, but they are not. I would not trust doing any questionably legal or ethically damaging practices over iMessage....we simply do not know where the messages are going, and if they are being stored on a server....we do *not* know. As was said before, every post you make on FaceBook, and every message is stored on a server, and every search you do when logged into google is recorded on your account. Every photo you post to Facebook is accessible by anybody at Facebook. I would be surprised if the photos you send on iMessage are not stored in the cloud on an Apple server....to be honest.
I mean, think about it....iMessage, after all is not a direct deal, it is done *through* Apple's servers...your messages go through, and are relayed by Apple's servers....so I would put money that the messages are stored there temporarily if not permanently. Apple is just not telling the public this....or there would be an outroar.
Don't waste your time, these people - who plainly have a lot to hide - aren't much more clued-in about the subject than the "researchers" who started all this in the first place.
Big companies never lie, I see no reason not to trust them.
At least it's not Google!
Google is big company also, I trust them, and don't mind their machine read my information and try to give me better ads.
More important, I think I don't have any secret that worth gov come to google or apple to require my chat history or email.
Yes. And I could choose to run over the next person I see at a crosswalk. Obviously, I have no desire to do so. I doubt Apple wants the ability to read or spoof messages.
I don't know if the Feds have the power to force Apple to do this. That's an entirely different question.
----------
It's not as far fetched as you think - there's a documentary movie made about this true story...
Image
See what you did?! Now I will have this image stuck in my head all day!
I am scared of the push now of using a BROAD brush to target someone instead of the traditional targeting a suspect using the traditional warrants.
The whole story of Lavabit really convinced me that there is an effort to extort small email companies and encryption. Plus online wen services are even close to being secured. Lastly ISP companies most likely had devices extorted to them the Lavabit way a long time ago.
The whole story of Lavabit really convinced me that there is an effort to extort small email companies and encryption. Plus online wen services are even close to being secured. Lastly ISP companies most likely had devices extorted to them the Lavabit way a long time ago.
*sigh* I guess I'll go back to writing my messages in lemon juice and getting the recipient to heat it up before it can be read.
Thats how afraid of Apple, NSA, Google, Facebook, Illuminati, NWO, CIA, etc... I am now.
Thats how afraid of Apple, NSA, Google, Facebook, Illuminati, NWO, CIA, etc... I am now.
"iMessage is not architected to allow Apple to read messages," said Apple spokeswoman Trudy Muller said in a statement to AllThingsD. "The research discussed theoretical vulnerabilities that would require Apple to re-engineer the iMessage system to exploit it, and Apple has no plans or intentions to do so."
BLANKET MESSAGE
What do you think this is for?
![apple-data-center-02-23-2011.jpg]()
BLANKET MESSAGE
What do you think this is for?
security researchers in order to get paid or have a job sometimes pull some vulnerabilities out of their ass right?
There is a huge difference between being "secure" and legally being seized by the government. Obviously facebook posts are public. What I'm talking about is the government seizing encrypted communications and decrypting them without due process (obtaining a warrant based on probable cause).
We have federal wiretapping and computer hacking laws that are supposed to keep the "bad guys" from stealing your communications. Yet, the government sees no problem in doing it.
The SCOTUS says that if I write a letter, put it in an envelope, seal it, and mail it through the USPS that I have an expectation of privacy and the govt cannot seize that letter without a warrant. The govt is supposed to obtain a wiretap warrant before listening into my phone calls. Yet, if I encrypt an email, IM, iMessage, text message, etc and send it to a specific user, the govt sees no moral or legal problem with them seizing that and decrypting and reading it, even if to obtain said communication they have to hack or violate federal laws to get access to it. The mere fact that the communication was encrypted means it was meant to be private, thus I have an expectation of privacy from governmental intrusion.
That's what I am talking about. I realize that everytime I perform a banking transaction online, or send an IM, etc. some nefarious person out there could possibly intercept it. However, in the process of doing so, they are violating federal laws. I still have an expectation of privacy.
Solution: adamantium-lined hat. Ideally, you'd want an unobtanium-lined hat, but a native uprising, I mean "revolution", cut off the supply.
----------
Fixing Apple Maps? Improving Siri?
I 100% agree with you. The only thing is many people aren't simply writing a harmless message like you send to your wife.
"If you're doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide from the giant surveillance apparatus the government's been hiding."
Apple has no intention of doing so. But the NSA now has intention of forcing them to do so and preventing them from being able to tell anyone. If the possibility even exists and the NSA thinks they can get more info than they already have, or in an easier fashion, I doubt they would hesitate to make it happen and there is nothing Apple or us could do about it.
From Apple's Website:
https://www.apple.com/apples-commitment-to-customer-privacy/
Apple’s Commitment to Customer Privacy
June 16, 2013
Two weeks ago, when technology companies were accused of indiscriminately sharing customer data with government agencies, Apple issued a clear response: We first heard of the government’s “Prism” program when news organizations asked us about it on June 6. We do not provide any government agency with direct access to our servers, and any government agency requesting customer content must get a court order.
Like several other companies, we have asked the U.S. government for permission to report how many requests we receive related to national security and how we handle them. We have been authorized to share some of that data, and we are providing it here in the interest of transparency.
From December 1, 2012 to May 31, 2013, Apple received between 4,000 and 5,000 requests from U.S. law enforcement for customer data. Between 9,000 and 10,000 accounts or devices were specified in those requests, which came from federal, state and local authorities and included both criminal investigations and national security matters. The most common form of request comes from police investigating robberies and other crimes, searching for missing children, trying to locate a patient with Alzheimer’s disease, or hoping to prevent a suicide.
Regardless of the circumstances, our Legal team conducts an evaluation of each request and, only if appropriate, we retrieve and deliver the narrowest possible set of information to the authorities. In fact, from time to time when we see inconsistencies or inaccuracies in a request, we will refuse to fulfill it.
Apple has always placed a priority on protecting our customers’ personal data, and we don’t collect or maintain a mountain of personal details about our customers in the first place. There are certain categories of information which we do not provide to law enforcement or any other group because we choose not to retain it.
For example, conversations which take place over iMessage and FaceTime are protected by end-to-end encryption so no one but the sender and receiver can see or read them. Apple cannot decrypt that data. Similarly, we do not store data related to customers’ location, Map searches or Siri requests in any identifiable form.
We will continue to work hard to strike the right balance between fulfilling our legal responsibilities and protecting our customers’ privacy as they expect and deserve.
https://www.apple.com/apples-commitment-to-customer-privacy/
Apple’s Commitment to Customer Privacy
June 16, 2013
Two weeks ago, when technology companies were accused of indiscriminately sharing customer data with government agencies, Apple issued a clear response: We first heard of the government’s “Prism” program when news organizations asked us about it on June 6. We do not provide any government agency with direct access to our servers, and any government agency requesting customer content must get a court order.
Like several other companies, we have asked the U.S. government for permission to report how many requests we receive related to national security and how we handle them. We have been authorized to share some of that data, and we are providing it here in the interest of transparency.
From December 1, 2012 to May 31, 2013, Apple received between 4,000 and 5,000 requests from U.S. law enforcement for customer data. Between 9,000 and 10,000 accounts or devices were specified in those requests, which came from federal, state and local authorities and included both criminal investigations and national security matters. The most common form of request comes from police investigating robberies and other crimes, searching for missing children, trying to locate a patient with Alzheimer’s disease, or hoping to prevent a suicide.
Regardless of the circumstances, our Legal team conducts an evaluation of each request and, only if appropriate, we retrieve and deliver the narrowest possible set of information to the authorities. In fact, from time to time when we see inconsistencies or inaccuracies in a request, we will refuse to fulfill it.
Apple has always placed a priority on protecting our customers’ personal data, and we don’t collect or maintain a mountain of personal details about our customers in the first place. There are certain categories of information which we do not provide to law enforcement or any other group because we choose not to retain it.
For example, conversations which take place over iMessage and FaceTime are protected by end-to-end encryption so no one but the sender and receiver can see or read them. Apple cannot decrypt that data. Similarly, we do not store data related to customers’ location, Map searches or Siri requests in any identifiable form.
We will continue to work hard to strike the right balance between fulfilling our legal responsibilities and protecting our customers’ privacy as they expect and deserve.
If Apple controls the encryption then of course they can decrypt and intercept iMessages if they want to or have to. Is anyone doubting this? It doesn't mean that they do it, but it is possible.
Anyway any form of encryption still deters other parties (be it government or private) from intercepting the messages without a proper warrant. I say deter because encryptions can be cracked. As we have seen in the Snowden files the NSA was for example able to intercept and decrypt Blackberry e-mails (which where thought of as secure) since 2010. Better than nothing though.
Anyway any form of encryption still deters other parties (be it government or private) from intercepting the messages without a proper warrant. I say deter because encryptions can be cracked. As we have seen in the Snowden files the NSA was for example able to intercept and decrypt Blackberry e-mails (which where thought of as secure) since 2010. Better than nothing though.
Last edited:
And the Alex Jones's of the world are all wrong, and the NSA isn't watching everything you do...
Oh wait..