Samsung also uses TrustZone with KNOX, and we all know how well that worked out.
The most interesting thing to me is how Qualcomm was able to patch the TrustZone flaw on device with a software update. I wonder why you need a software update to patch a flaw in a secured piece of hardware? That's because TrustZone is a solution that's hardware AND software based. And, like Android, the specifications are well known which will make it much easier for people to find an exploit.
You're just full of wisdom, aren't you? Yes, they had the foresight to purchase the core tech, and then engineered the **** out of it to create the final product and integrate it into their devices. I love how you give them zero credit for that, and pretend that all they did was throw some cash out. All your posts in this thread have been either purposefully obtuse, lies, or trolling.
Perhaps obtuse. No I didn't give Apple credit in this thread but I have done so in the past. Yes their implementation was far superior to whatever came before, and after but that doesn't change the fact that the idea wasn't new. For the record I will say this, I don't believe that this will work unless somebody comes up with an implementation that supercedes Apple's.
The most interesting thing to me is how Qualcomm was able to patch the TrustZone flaw on device with a software update. I wonder why you need a software update to patch a flaw in a secured piece of hardware? That's because TrustZone is a solution that's hardware AND software based. And, like Android, the specifications are well known which will make it much easier for people to find an exploit.
Any security product has to have thoroughly-documented specifications for one to be able to comment on its security. You can't judge the security of a protocol without understanding exactly how it works.
Is AppleInsider staff ignorant or dishonest to AI readers? Motorola had made one smartphone with fingerprint sensor on its back on an Android phone. So it is obvious Motorola did not see their fingerprint sensor is not good. In fact, the fingerprint sensor on Samsung GS5 and GS6 uses the same method as the Motorola one. I think AI Staff avoid to characterize Motorola or other Android manufacturers as inferior.
Is AppleInsider staff ignorant or dishonest to AI readers? Motorola had made one smartphone with fingerprint sensor on its back on an Android phone. So it is obvious Motorola did not see their fingerprint sensor is not good. In fact, the fingerprint sensor on Samsung GS5 and GS6 uses the same method as the Motorola one. I think AI Staff avoid to characterize Motorola or other Android manufacturers as inferior.
Thanks for showing me another Apple innovation Samsung/Google just blatantly copied over. I am reading that Android Fan defense is Apple bought it from outside. They forgot that Apple's innovation is integrating it onto the home button and invented a way to register it. All these things the Android world just try to blatantly copy over without giving a read credit to Apple. Fortunately, Apple has learned from its experiences with PC manufacturers. I believe Apple has successfully let most consumers know who is the real innovators despite the dishonesty of the media.
Doesn't matter. Apple didn't come up with the idea, nor the tech. They purchased it.
Ah, the old "but they bought it!" troll line.
Answer: it doesn't matter. Any more than the fact that Google bought android. All companies were free to invest in the same (working tech) and roll it out, but didn't. Apple did first. That's why they get the kudos and your boys get the copy-cat hat.
yup, because when Apple does it, it will be easy to use and broadly compatible with myriad third party apps, not just a tick-mark on a feature list with a wanky implementation.
So if Apple comes with a bright idea it is innovative. If another company comes up with a bright idea, it is not innovative, unless Apple embraces the idea and improves it, but again only Apple is innovative. Let me remind you that both iOS 8.0 and OSX 10.10.0 were very wanky when they were launched. Because of wifi issues it took me until 10.10.2 before I could reliably take backups with Time Machine as I did in Mavericks. If you call this innovation, I prefer to let it pass.
yup, because when Apple does it, it will be easy to use and broadly compatible with myriad third party apps, not just a tick-mark on a feature list with a wanky implementation.
Is that how it works on Windows 8/10? I wouldn't know because I don't use either of those operating systems.
Why, is split screen a built in Android feature right now? No, it isn't. Way to completely miss the point. When Apple implements something, it isn't to flagrantly attempt to reproduce the success of something else. When others do, its usually to reproduce Apple's success. Thats the obvious difference. Apple made biometrics mainstream and reliable. Thats why others are now focusing more on it. Apple adds features when it truly believes it can do them better and that they enhance the product.
I wasn't necessarily referring to Android. But some are so quick to claim Apple is being copied when the same accusation could be thrown at Apple in some instances. It is a fact that Samsung and others had larger screen smart phones before Apple did. And the iPhone 6 is just a bigger iPhone there's nothing revolutionary or novel about it. If Apple had come out with a 5 inch phone in 2012 and then we saw one from Samsung 2 years later you can damn well bet people here would be howling about Samsung copying Apple. Same thing if Apple had inter-app communications, 3rd party keyboards and actionable notifications before Android did.
Any security product has to have thoroughly-documented specifications for one to be able to comment on its security. You can't judge the security of a protocol without understanding exactly how it works.
That's not what I said. There's a difference between having APIs available to a developer to use features, and a developer having access to the actual source code for the OS.
There's no public specification for Apples Secure Enclave. In fact, reading articles about Apple encryption this becomes very clear. While many understand the basic concepts, it quickly turns into a "we don't know how A or B works, but we have an idea" situation.
It will always be easier to exploit a system where the complete specifications are known than a system where only portions are known.
I wasn't necessarily referring to Android. But some are so quick to claim Apple is being copied when the same accusation could be thrown at Apple in some instances. It is a fact that Samsung and others had larger screen smart phones before Apple did. And the iPhone 6 is just a bigger iPhone there's nothing revolutionary or novel about it. If Apple had come out with a 5 inch phone in 2012 and then we saw one from Samsung 2 years later you can damn well bet people here would be howling about Samsung copying Apple. Same thing if Apple had inter-app communications, 3rd party keyboards and actionable notifications before Android did.
You do realize Apple kicked off the modern mobile platform right? Prior to that screens were tiny and most of them were not touch sensitive. Just because some one came along and made a bigger screen doesn't make them an "innovator".
You do realize Apple kicked off the modern mobile platform right? Prior to that screens were tiny and most of them were not touch sensitive. Just because some one came along and made a bigger screen doesn't make them an "innovator".
Either introducing something new or refining a feature set to work seamlessly and better than current iterations.
Cloud drive as Apple's version of DropBox, not innovative. Touch ID's sensor tied in to the processor ID to create a unique encryption key and spanning it across a 64 bit memory address innovative.
Increasing screen size by .x inches not innovative. Creating a payment system where the retailer never has access to your credit card information innovative.
If increasing screen size is innovative then you could says TV manufacturers are innovative and we all know that isn't the case.
Either introducing something new or refining a feature set to work seamlessly and better than current iterations.
Cloud drive as Apple's version of DropBox, not innovative. Touch ID's sensor tied in to the processor ID to create a unique encryption key and spanning it across a 64 bit memory address innovative.
Increasing screen size by .x inches not innovative. Creating a payment system where the retailer never has access to your credit card information innovative.
If increasing screen size is innovative then you could says TV manufacturers are innovative and we all know that isn't the case.
Verifone have had a solution designed to do just that since 2008.
Quote:
Comprehensive End-to-End Encryption and Tokenization Solution
By combining end-to-end encryption (E2EE) and data tokenization, our solution addresses the root cause of data theft by removing cardholder data from the retail environment.
Comments
The TrustZone that had a vulnerability discovered and had to be patched?
https://www.blackhat.com/docs/us-14/materials/us-14-Rosenberg-Reflections-On-Trusting-TrustZone-WP.pdf
http://www.droid-life.com/2014/08/08/qualcomm-issues-statement-on-dan-rosenbergs-trustzone-vulernability/
Here's an earlier success getting into TrustZone to unlock a device.
http://blog.azimuthsecurity.com/2013/04/unlocking-motorola-bootloader.html
Samsung also uses TrustZone with KNOX, and we all know how well that worked out.
The most interesting thing to me is how Qualcomm was able to patch the TrustZone flaw on device with a software update. I wonder why you need a software update to patch a flaw in a secured piece of hardware? That's because TrustZone is a solution that's hardware AND software based. And, like Android, the specifications are well known which will make it much easier for people to find an exploit.
Perhaps obtuse. No I didn't give Apple credit in this thread but I have done so in the past. Yes their implementation was far superior to whatever came before, and after but that doesn't change the fact that the idea wasn't new. For the record I will say this, I don't believe that this will work unless somebody comes up with an implementation that supercedes Apple's.
...
The most interesting thing to me is how Qualcomm was able to patch the TrustZone flaw on device with a software update. I wonder why you need a software update to patch a flaw in a secured piece of hardware? That's because TrustZone is a solution that's hardware AND software based. And, like Android, the specifications are well known which will make it much easier for people to find an exploit.
Any security product has to have thoroughly-documented specifications for one to be able to comment on its security. You can't judge the security of a protocol without understanding exactly how it works.
Is AppleInsider staff ignorant or dishonest to AI readers? Motorola had made one smartphone with fingerprint sensor on its back on an Android phone. So it is obvious Motorola did not see their fingerprint sensor is not good. In fact, the fingerprint sensor on Samsung GS5 and GS6 uses the same method as the Motorola one. I think AI Staff avoid to characterize Motorola or other Android manufacturers as inferior.
Is AppleInsider staff ignorant or dishonest to AI readers? Motorola had made one smartphone with fingerprint sensor on its back on an Android phone. So it is obvious Motorola did not see their fingerprint sensor is not good. In fact, the fingerprint sensor on Samsung GS5 and GS6 uses the same method as the Motorola one. I think AI Staff avoid to characterize Motorola or other Android manufacturers as inferior.
According to the table here (http://www.anandtech.com/show/9146/the-samsung-galaxy-s6-and-s6-edge-review), the GS6 uses a touch sensor, not a swipe sensor.
According to the table here (http://www.anandtech.com/show/9146/the-samsung-galaxy-s6-and-s6-edge-review), the GS6 uses a touch sensor, not a swipe sensor.
Thanks for showing me another Apple innovation Samsung/Google just blatantly copied over. I am reading that Android Fan defense is Apple bought it from outside. They forgot that Apple's innovation is integrating it onto the home button and invented a way to register it. All these things the Android world just try to blatantly copy over without giving a read credit to Apple. Fortunately, Apple has learned from its experiences with PC manufacturers. I believe Apple has successfully let most consumers know who is the real innovators despite the dishonesty of the media.
Ah, the old "but they bought it!" troll line.
Answer: it doesn't matter. Any more than the fact that Google bought android. All companies were free to invest in the same (working tech) and roll it out, but didn't. Apple did first. That's why they get the kudos and your boys get the copy-cat hat.
The implementation is the only thing that matters.
There's no implementation if there's no idea.
yup, because when Apple does it, it will be easy to use and broadly compatible with myriad third party apps, not just a tick-mark on a feature list with a wanky implementation.
So if Apple comes with a bright idea it is innovative. If another company comes up with a bright idea, it is not innovative, unless Apple embraces the idea and improves it, but again only Apple is innovative. Let me remind you that both iOS 8.0 and OSX 10.10.0 were very wanky when they were launched. Because of wifi issues it took me until 10.10.2 before I could reliably take backups with Time Machine as I did in Mavericks. If you call this innovation, I prefer to let it pass.
Is that how it works on Windows 8/10? I wouldn't know because I don't use either of those operating systems.
I wasn't necessarily referring to Android. But some are so quick to claim Apple is being copied when the same accusation could be thrown at Apple in some instances. It is a fact that Samsung and others had larger screen smart phones before Apple did. And the iPhone 6 is just a bigger iPhone there's nothing revolutionary or novel about it. If Apple had come out with a 5 inch phone in 2012 and then we saw one from Samsung 2 years later you can damn well bet people here would be howling about Samsung copying Apple. Same thing if Apple had inter-app communications, 3rd party keyboards and actionable notifications before Android did.
That's not what I said. There's a difference between having APIs available to a developer to use features, and a developer having access to the actual source code for the OS.
There's no public specification for Apples Secure Enclave. In fact, reading articles about Apple encryption this becomes very clear. While many understand the basic concepts, it quickly turns into a "we don't know how A or B works, but we have an idea" situation.
It will always be easier to exploit a system where the complete specifications are known than a system where only portions are known.
no. as in IP and patent law, the idea is the worthless part...the implementation is what matters. anybody can have an idea.
No idea= no IP and no implementation. The idea gives birth to the others.
You do realize Apple kicked off the modern mobile platform right? Prior to that screens were tiny and most of them were not touch sensitive. Just because some one came along and made a bigger screen doesn't make them an "innovator".
What would you define innovation as.
Either introducing something new or refining a feature set to work seamlessly and better than current iterations.
Cloud drive as Apple's version of DropBox, not innovative. Touch ID's sensor tied in to the processor ID to create a unique encryption key and spanning it across a 64 bit memory address innovative.
Increasing screen size by .x inches not innovative. Creating a payment system where the retailer never has access to your credit card information innovative.
If increasing screen size is innovative then you could says TV manufacturers are innovative and we all know that isn't the case.
Either introducing something new or refining a feature set to work seamlessly and better than current iterations.
Cloud drive as Apple's version of DropBox, not innovative. Touch ID's sensor tied in to the processor ID to create a unique encryption key and spanning it across a 64 bit memory address innovative.
Increasing screen size by .x inches not innovative. Creating a payment system where the retailer never has access to your credit card information innovative.
If increasing screen size is innovative then you could says TV manufacturers are innovative and we all know that isn't the case.
Verifone have had a solution designed to do just that since 2008.
Comprehensive End-to-End Encryption and Tokenization Solution
By combining end-to-end encryption (E2EE) and data tokenization, our solution addresses the root cause of data theft by removing cardholder data from the retail environment.