SMS is hilariously insecure, and messaging is a critical piece of infrastructure. I’m shocked that the government has taken so long forcing Apple to play nicely with other platforms, considering international data security.
No, but API interoperability with literally anything else would be a damn good start. Right now Apple sues anyone who tries to make a bridge between iMessage and other standards.
Why? iMessage is a proprietary platform that Apple invested billions into. Expecting them to have API inter-op is idiotic. It’s not like you can’t text people outside of iMessage. There’s SMS, and people are free to use it. Expecting a “bridge” between two standards for the sake of having a bridge tells me people do not know how any of this works and are just parroting the same stupid arguments put forth by people that, again, do not understand how a technology is planned for, developed and maintained.
If there’s such an appetite, ask the fucking government to set a standard and ask every smartphone operating in the country to comply. It’s really that simple.
upvoted for you last paragraph. bingo. and i’d love that. all the basic functions should be done to a standard, and a good one to boot. save time, money, and bullshit baby games on all sides.
Don’t bother mate. Lemmy is a dumpster fire filled with angsty teenagers who hate their green bubble. It’ll be another couple decades before they understand how the world works.
How would a third party client guarantee e2e encryption with iMessage?
And by what mechanism was that company enabling that bridge? Did that mechanism store iCloud credentials? Did it encrypt the drives the users iCloud data could have been downloaded to? Did they have access to iMessages in clear text before forwarding them?
I’m not a programmer, but this doesn’t seem hard. The API could specify a cryptographic standard. Third party clients don’t need access to iCloud data, just the API to pass message and attachment content in encrypted form with a standardized handshake.
SMS works. iMessage works. Both work in tandem on a device and there’s a distinction which is which, therefore you get full access to and from when communicating with a device. I’m shocked that there’s this lunacy around conflating the two or expecting two different standards to work because people want to.
I want to have flying cars and breathe underwater without any equipment next, guess lets file a lawsuit forcing sub makers and car makers to go make that happen.
SMS is hilariously insecure, and messaging is a critical piece of infrastructure. I’m shocked that the government has taken so long forcing Apple to play nicely with other platforms, considering international data security.
What are you asking for? For iMessage to become the standard for messaging?
It’s the telcos fault SMS sucks and it’s the telcos fault RCS is a joke unless you use Googles implementation on Android.
No, but API interoperability with literally anything else would be a damn good start. Right now Apple sues anyone who tries to make a bridge between iMessage and other standards.
Why? iMessage is a proprietary platform that Apple invested billions into. Expecting them to have API inter-op is idiotic. It’s not like you can’t text people outside of iMessage. There’s SMS, and people are free to use it. Expecting a “bridge” between two standards for the sake of having a bridge tells me people do not know how any of this works and are just parroting the same stupid arguments put forth by people that, again, do not understand how a technology is planned for, developed and maintained.
If there’s such an appetite, ask the fucking government to set a standard and ask every smartphone operating in the country to comply. It’s really that simple.
upvoted for you last paragraph. bingo. and i’d love that. all the basic functions should be done to a standard, and a good one to boot. save time, money, and bullshit baby games on all sides.
Don’t bother mate. Lemmy is a dumpster fire filled with angsty teenagers who hate their green bubble. It’ll be another couple decades before they understand how the world works.
How would a third party client guarantee e2e encryption with iMessage?
And by what mechanism was that company enabling that bridge? Did that mechanism store iCloud credentials? Did it encrypt the drives the users iCloud data could have been downloaded to? Did they have access to iMessages in clear text before forwarding them?
The entire web is built on standardized e2e encryption schemes fought for by techie nerds so that we don’t have these problems there.
I’m not a programmer, but this doesn’t seem hard. The API could specify a cryptographic standard. Third party clients don’t need access to iCloud data, just the API to pass message and attachment content in encrypted form with a standardized handshake.
What am I missing?
And what data would this client be handling via the API?
Even Signal discourages third party apps for this reason you are indeed missing.
Signal is open source. That’s why they warn against using third party closed source apps which cannot be security audited.
iMessage is a proprietary app that cannot be security audited. An open source alternative would be more secure, not less.
People forget the state of SMS before Apple decided to tell telcos to go fuck themselves and rolled out iMessage.
Americans would still be paying per-text message without Apple.
Nothing is stopping people from downloading whatever chat app they want to use. EU has done that.
I’m saying this is a national security issue. The government has a vested interest in killing off SMS as soon as possible.
SMS works. iMessage works. Both work in tandem on a device and there’s a distinction which is which, therefore you get full access to and from when communicating with a device. I’m shocked that there’s this lunacy around conflating the two or expecting two different standards to work because people want to.
I want to have flying cars and breathe underwater without any equipment next, guess lets file a lawsuit forcing sub makers and car makers to go make that happen.