Apple has to comply with the legal process; however, that said, the government doesn't have access to your iMessage from Apple as those are end to end encrypted.
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 Shares New 'Inside Joke' Privacy-Focused Video Highlighting iMessage Encryption
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple has to comply with the legal process; however, that said, the government doesn't have access to your iMessage from Apple as those are end to end encrypted.
PickUrPoison
macrumors G3
There are plenty of legitimate criticisms to be made about Apple without having to make things up.
My guess would be that Tim probably told Angela Ahrendts that it would be best if she were to move on. It’s not necessary to publicly fire someone unless you’re making a statement, typically regarding unacceptable behavior. But I could very well be wrong and she jumped, rather than was pushed. Who knows? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
russell_314
Suspended
The iMessage vs Whatsapp debate again. That hasn't been raked over the coals in this forum a few thousand times before lol. If you are using Android or perhaps a Windows phone then that's a good choice. Since I use an iPhone, many people who are security focused used iPhones, and this is an Apple (iPhone) forum I think iMessage is the recommended option.
I think you may be confused. You can message anyone with an iPhone. Those are our green bubble friends. You may have forgotten to turn on SMS feature in your settings.
russell_314
Suspended
It's SMS and not iMessage then. The whole X messenger program vs iMessage can be an entire thread and I'm sure there are threads started with that topic. It's all about using the best tool for the need. There's not one that's "better" for everyone. There's one that's better for me though. Can you guess what that might be?
You're missing my point. I was responding to the post that stated iMessage "was useless" because you couldn't communicated with people on other platforms, which is incorrect, not whether one platform was better than others.
iCloud backups are encrypted but only Apple has the key. On device, only you have the key to your own device. There is a difference but yes, Apple could decrypt you iMessage for a legal government request for instance.
Apple now lets you use @icloud.com, @me.com etc as your primary ID. You are free to change it. I did as soon as I was able to. I believe they did it last year.
fairuz
macrumors 68020
What do you mean by "all the recent issues?" Android paired with non-Google hardware (or somewhat even with Google hardware) has been a continuous privacy breach since forever, and that includes right now.
[doublepost=1557599092][/doublepost]
You have a similar problem with Whatsapp and Signal, finding people who use it. Sure it's free, but you're still gonna have a hard time telling your friends to download a separate messaging app to talk to you. There's also no graceful fallback to SMS like iMessage has.
IMO iMessage + SMS is more than sufficient for most people. SMS ain't bad. You get to use iMessage sometimes, not always, but that's better than never. And upgrades to the SMS standard will come with time.
Last edited:
Tick410
macrumors member
It was a bug that allowed people to listen to your conversations after you closed the app, which is an invasion of "PRIVACY". Also the hacked iCloud photos that caused "The Fapenning". Where movie stars iClouds were hacked and there personal photos were spread around the net. Please stop the fanboying for Apple. Hackers get hack anything. No way to be protected with anything connected to the internet.
Who cares what the joke is. She has the best laugh...ever.
Now why would you go and let facts get in the way of someone's posturing?
Now why would you go and let facts get in the way of someone's posturing?
fairuz
macrumors 68020
He means encrypted end-to-end. Your iCloud backups aren't encrypted end-to-end, only in transit and at rest. Ofc, as many (including me) have said, even Apple's e2ee doesn't mean you can trust Apple not to deliberately man-in-the-middle attack you.
[doublepost=1557604537][/doublepost]
Those are bugs, not intention. The iCloud thing was just bad design, not forcing 2FA for accounts that upload photos. They're all pretty rare. Google and Amazon spy on their users intentionally, plus Android is overall designed to be less secure, which is fine as a compromise for making it so widely available.
What you're saying is like saying transmitting plaintext over the wire is as secure as HTTPS because sometimes someone finds a vulnerability. It's possible for something to be "more secure" without being bulletproof. And... the same to all the above for privacy, but privacy and security get mixed up so much that I don't try to separate them.
Last edited:
...until her reckless friend posts the conversation on social media to score points with an audience.
Face it. Most of the examples surrounding privacy harms were self-inflicted or a breach of trust between people that know each other.
The whole point of this thread is that privacy is important so iMessage is needed rather than SMS.
In this context your "graceful fallback" is just another massive FaceTime-style security breach.
If you're going to use SMS there was zero point in pretending privacy ever mattered in the first place.
[doublepost=1557606301][/doublepost]
You're the product with Tim's Apple Services too. You agree to being profiled on your Apple News interests. Apple won't share that information, but only because it wants to charge a 30% commission to arrange targeted adverts on other companies' behalf.
At least with Google the payoff for targeted adverts is a free service, but Tim also wants to charge you $10/month for this.
I7guy
macrumors Westmere
You are conflating that Apple is stating they have a policy in place for privacy of user data, while not blocking legacy services because YOU are spouting this is the antithesis of privacy. That's been the fallacious arguments of the critics. "How can Apple tout privacy, when they allow access to google and SMS" and take money from google.
Of course I would want to be the product with certain interests and I would want to un-product myself as well. You can do that with apple news. Good luck with deleting your search history from googles servers, totally. The reason Apple can do what it does, it makes money for all involved and is above board with how your pii is handled.
I7guy
macrumors Westmere
There is a lot of spin within this post.
You can call the facetime bug "invasion of privacy", go for it. But apple didn't lose the case so it was a "invasion of privacy" in name only. No damages were proved.
The icloud unauthorized access was the result of bad security practices on users part and phishing attempts. Do not blame apple for that.
So if you request people to stop the fanboying, you should stop with the spin and have an above board discussion on an on-line internet forum.
M2M
macrumors 6502
“We care about privacy as long as it is compliant with laws. In the latter case we don’t care and shut up.”
T. Cook
Oh and here I was thinking their "Pro" lineup and keyboards were an inside joke, a "**** you" to the customer if you will.
Swift
macrumors 68000
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is how you make a dynamite ad about privacy.
[doublepost=1557620892][/doublepost]By the way, is there a single comments section on the Internet without trolls? When there's nothing bad to say about the story, just find something else, completely off the subject, to complain about. Johnny Bring-downs.
[doublepost=1557621879][/doublepost]
In fact, when Apple understood the problem, they turned it off immediately. If any real harm was done in that short a time, it should be known by now. Certainly there was not a large number, or we would have known it for sure. Maybe the few who had the chance to use the new FaceTime were limited to start with, and they got a mysterious screen and a freeze. There was a way in from there, but I don't think there is evidence of a zero-day being out before that. There were black hatters all around. Turning off the server meant they saw only what they saw.. The flaw with FaceTime was the new ability to have 32 people on a chat. How many would be using that in the first day or two? I think a decision would likely say there are no victims you can point to. People will make mistakes. They need to tell you about them and develop in a way where they can crash-code a fix, check it, make sure it's right, and let it out within... was it a week? FaceTime always worked. You just couldn't get the thing they thought would work but had a bad flaw. Accidental discovery. Bad bug. But it needed a delivery system of special software. Takes a little time. Just produce people with damages.
[doublepost=1557620892][/doublepost]By the way, is there a single comments section on the Internet without trolls? When there's nothing bad to say about the story, just find something else, completely off the subject, to complain about. Johnny Bring-downs.
[doublepost=1557621879][/doublepost]
In fact, when Apple understood the problem, they turned it off immediately. If any real harm was done in that short a time, it should be known by now. Certainly there was not a large number, or we would have known it for sure. Maybe the few who had the chance to use the new FaceTime were limited to start with, and they got a mysterious screen and a freeze. There was a way in from there, but I don't think there is evidence of a zero-day being out before that. There were black hatters all around. Turning off the server meant they saw only what they saw.. The flaw with FaceTime was the new ability to have 32 people on a chat. How many would be using that in the first day or two? I think a decision would likely say there are no victims you can point to. People will make mistakes. They need to tell you about them and develop in a way where they can crash-code a fix, check it, make sure it's right, and let it out within... was it a week? FaceTime always worked. You just couldn't get the thing they thought would work but had a bad flaw. Accidental discovery. Bad bug. But it needed a delivery system of special software. Takes a little time. Just produce people with damages.
Justanotherfanboy
Suspended
Lol, are any of these “numerous” apps preloaded and automatically used on LITERALLY every single Android phone sold, so that with 0% trouble, energy, or effort... all your communication to anyone else on that platform will be encrypted??
If not... (rhetorical, of course- we know they’re not), then that was probably a really really really bad example.
Such delusion... that although everyone that owns a secure phone (an iPhone) is already having private conversations with anyone else that also owns a secure phone (again; an iPhone), there’s somehow something bad or wrong with that & they should instead be sometimes using the standard text app to text & sometimes throwing any of a handful of other text apps into the mix; needlessly complicating what should be perhaps one of the most basic and simple functions on a phone.
Further... trying to convince friends, family, loved ones, & acquaintances that they should doing this insanity as well, so you actually have other people you can contact on these apps.
I suppose since FaceTime Audio has better reception than a standard call, rather than enjoying the simplicity of that fact... I should find like a half dozen “hd audio” calling apps, try to convince everyone I know to do the same, & then we can all have a bunch of different dialers to choose from & keep track of every time we make or receive a call, right?