Two words. Status Symbol, just like having “Sent from my iPhone” as the footer of a persons email.
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 Puts a Stop to Beeper Mini's iMessage for Android Feature
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Nope. RCS is making SMS better, it is not solving it. RCS Apple is going to implement is missing E2EE.
And this reverse-engineered iMessage approach supported E2EE and was running locally on the device (no middle man, no data exposure to 3rd party). So I know it is hard to swallow for some, but this Beeper thing was actually more privacy friendly and more secure than what Apple is preparing with RCS or what Apple customers have now (totally insecure SMS).
That's really far fetched. Is this the case in US? If so, then it's really sad. All I can say - in the EU, there's no such thing you are talking about.
Android bros want the blue bubbles while simultaneously saying that only Apple users care about the bubbles lmfao. Even with RCS coming, they are not happy.
Unless the carriers adopt Apple’s proposals for E2EE (which I’d give *maybe* a 50/50 chance, at least in the US, given how thoroughly they’re tied to both their own monetization of telemetry and to 3 letter agency data collection) RCS isnt solving the key thing iMessage does
Most of them wanting iMessage literally do not care about any of the features you are saying. They are whining about it because they want to "not be left out" of Group chats. And because the kids are being bullied lmao.
Personally, i honestly don't even really care about security lol. I dont mean idc in the sense security isn't that important to me but I dont go into an app and wonder how secure it is simply because i am not sending anything I care enough about some random seeing.
I am not committing crimes or plotting anything and if someone wants to hack and see my booty pic i sent some random moron from a bar I met drunk, go for it
I of course get the reasoning for security but for me (who knows tech well) and the average consimer (who doesnt), it isn't a real issue.
We also don't know what RCS Apple is implementing. They aren't following Google's standard but we dont know until it happens. It's apple, i ca't see them half-arsing it.
Not far fetchd'd at all. I honestly have never realized Green vs Blue biubbles was still a thing in 2023.
I also didnt think the Android vs IOS war was still a thing.
Android users really still refer to IOS users as Sheeples and imply we are not intelligent enough to leave the walled garden
But yes apparently in America, we are still in 2009 where the iPhone was on ONE CARRIER and people were jealous they couldnt get it.
As someone said above, apparently in America, the iPhone is considered a status symbol lol. Like having "Sent from iPhone" in emails.
I remember when i cared about things like that. Back in 2009...When i was 14 lmfao and i wanted EVERYONE to know i had an iPhone.
Which is what? Because most users wanting iMessage are not wanting it for the security. They want blue bubbles (but then deny it lol) so they can stop being bullied.
They want to send high quality videos and images vs compressed with SMS
and they want to be able to group chat with no issues.
So what is RCS still not going to solve that they need iMessage?
If you can send iMessages without your identity being verified and it is linked only to your phone number (which can easily be spoofed, you can read about it), then you can theoretically intercept data. I’m not saying that’s the case but it was probably possible. And who knows whether it wasn’t actively used.
No, you could not intercept data.
Intercepting data and breaking through E2EE and having possibility to send messages without Apple ID to another Apple IDs is completely different territory.
First thing is very serious security issue and the second one (the case which happened) is just annoyance, because it allows more spamming in the iMessage platform.
You *literally* cut off the part where I answered that, which is impressive given the whole post was 2 sentences long
And if you think users dont care about E2EE I’ll point out that WhatsApp and Signal both use signal’s E2EE protocol, which is *vastly* more widely used than RCS or iMessage, and Meta just announced E2EE for messenger because it’s been such a demanded feature that they defied the very public pressure from the FBI and others to roll it out
Last edited:
That’s a complete misunderstanding about what E2EE solves
Think about HTTPS, it guarantees that the sender and the receiver are the only ones that can read the traffic, and a cert from a verified CA (like most sites you’ll use) additionally verifies that the cert was issued to someone with control of the domain in question . That’s it
Dont worry, you’re not alone though, this is part of why there’s been recent debates about removing the lock icon from browsers with https: a lot of folks misunderstand what it means
Only a matter of time before the EU decides iMessage is a gatekeeper and as such forces Apple to open it to competitors. After usb c and the imminent ‘side loading’ (more commonly known as downloading) another embarrassment is coming for Apple.
iMessage is not a reason for platform switch. The entire apple ecosystem is the reason and how apple has crafted it, the user experience etc.
I was using your “if apple “ start to the hypothesis. Creating a separate app is not the apple way. I’ve seen posts start in MR “if apple cared about privacy they would block google….”. Loads of nonsense they are.
How do you know that?
Anybody using the app could send and receive iMessages by only providing a phone number, no additional authentication was needed. How can you be sure that someone using a spoofing SIM card (using the same phone number as of an existing iMessage user) wouldn't be able to send/receive messages simultaneously with the genuine iMessage user? Usually iMessages can be received on multiple devices at the same time, so the spoofing number is yet another device pretending to be a user that it isn't. That has nothing to do with E2E which only guarantees encryption between the two parties but doesn't guarantee their identity which is exactly the concern I am raising.
And? Apple is not obligated to solve a telecom’s problem, and they certainly have no obligation to accept Google’s RCS fork as a charity move. I pay a premium because I want to curb data collection and therefore use iOS. Apple also has no obligation (nor would it make any business sense) to provide android users with free perks that I pay to receive. Are you willing to PAY to use iMessage? If not, then you can’t have it.
She's a 28 year old woman which makes it even funnier because the posts read like a 16 year old boy. Lmao.
I was simply pointing out RCS isnt a replacement. There are free replacements. Outside the US they represent the majority of mess aging
Because I know what E2EE is and how it works. And I know Beeper guys did not find security hole in the Apple's E2EE implementation.
I also know there's difference between having possibility to send iMessage without Apple ID and spoof another Apple ID or link a different number to existing Apple ID without having access to such Apple ID.
I did not cut your answer out. I simply asked what else is needed from iMessage in Apple's flavor of RCS? Because the average Android user does not even know what RCS is.
I never said users don't care. I said MOST users don't care. Because they don't lmao. Considering most people (i am guilty of this even though i know better) use the same passwords or some variation of it for everything, you honestly think the average person really cares or knows what E2EE is?
My mother is a prime example of this. It blew her mind the other day when I logged into Hulu on her smart TV simply by going to the link on my phone and signing in with my phone VS the archaic way of typing it in literally letter by letter.
She is an intelligent woman in her own right but not tech savvy at all.
She uses whatsapp regularly on her pixel(i was very surprised to learn this). Not because she cares about security or knows what E2EE is. She simply learned from the many vacations she takes overseas and crusies, that it is easier to text people from other countries.
So no most users really DONT care about security since they really are ignorant to the fact. Us here on Macrumors and enthusiast sites do care because we know more than the average jill or joe about tech.
An already started conversation has already had a key exchange, spoofing a SIM card doesnt allow for intercepting that on its own, the keys are on the endpoints. For new conversations (or rotated keys depending on Apple’s implementation) you’re still only verifying control of the endpoint, not identity
You are confusing transport encryption and identity management. These are different problems.
You're both missing the point. I'm not saying there's a hole in the E2EE. I'm saying there's a possible identity concern in the iMessage protocol because the only "authentication" it seems to have required is a valid phone number that can be spoofed. Identity concerns are also security concerns. If someone on the other end says "I'm your wife" and you don't have means to validate that's indeed your wife, it doesn't matter if your communication is encrypted end-to-end, there's already an authentication issue. Authentication is also part of security.
And what I’m saying is that’s not a security flaw, it’s literally an expected part of such a protocol.
I guess this is where someone who’s used to dealing with the difference when implementing and especially when documenting for compliance at work (me) runs headlong into user expectations.
This is a common pair of problems on the tech side of things, and they’re solved differently and usually on different layers.
I guess this is how lawyers feel when the jury expects “zoom in and enhance” and thinks DNA evidence is bulletproof
iOS does allow side loading. I pay the $99 yearly developer fee to do it. I have two side loaded apps on my iPhone, one being a modified YouTube app that allows me to hide Shorts. I also pay for YT Premium, which doesn’t allow that, so I use the mod.
Not all of us are pirates and cheapskates.
Last edited:
I think all the people here saying they’re “glad” Apple is putting a stop to this need some sort of therapy or the realization they might end up in an actual cult one day.
On the other front I’m happy this doesn’t work because when I went to go try it on my Android phone, it told me I would have to pay $1.99 a month. GTFOH.
On the other front I’m happy this doesn’t work because when I went to go try it on my Android phone, it told me I would have to pay $1.99 a month. GTFOH.