So if she claims that SMS is not secure, why she doesn’t push the carriers to work on more secure revision… it’s like shouting - my car is not safe, i demand you to provide me yours…
Blanked statements about generational differences aside, EW has proven time and time again she knows nothing about technology. It's like my old boss (who's in his 80s) used to say: If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with your bullshit. EW is full of the latter.
She's a boomer. Those types don't do well with technology. Her and her staff need to educate themselves before posting the nonsense.
Boomer here; I'll be 63 next year.
I've been programming, repairing, and/or building computers and networks since the late 70s, both professionally and as a hobbyist. Mainframes, minis, PCs, phones, Raspberry Pi, and a couple more.
No age group has a lock on understanding technology, just like no age group has a lock on understanding how to build a bridge or dig a ditch.
Well said fellow boomer. The previous commenter's remarks are a textbook example of the hasty generalization fallacy.
I believe that one's understanding of just about any topic, including communication technology, is driven primarily by a person's curiosity, inquisitiveness, and desire to continue to learn throughout their lifetime. It doesn't matter where or when you started or what's topical at any given point in time because it's only going to change going forward. To keep up and continue feed your curiosity you're always climbing yet another learning curve. It never really stops, well, until you stop breathing or get permanently bogged down in anti-learning and cognitive erosion activities like conspiracy theories and politics.
Shes right you know. All this has just proven that there are no technological reasons to stop this. Only financial ones
Of course. But of course the irrational fanbois will say you're wrong.
Her argument is fucking nonsense. If you had even the faintest idea about the actual subject matter, you would easily acknowledge that this is, in fact, a security issue.
And of course, the first step to proving your rationality is claiming that anyone who disagrees is an "irrational fanboi", right?
Fucking pathetic.
Most Geeks, the EU and the Android world support some variation of her crap, Apple is too big and successful. And last but not least why can't Apple do computing like Microsoft/Google/Intel. In short be non vertical.
She's a boomer. Those types don't do well with technology. Her and her staff need to educate themselves before posting the nonsense.
Before you say, "OK Boomer," just know that some of us geezers have been deeply involved in technology for fifty years.
And before you dismiss the relevance of that experience, remember that you, too, will not look so good when you 900 years old are.
Unfortunately having has a history of being “deeply involved in technology” for half a century doesn’t exclude someone from not being able to understand both technological and societal changes.
For one to, say, be an nonagenarian and still grasp how and why newer technologies have appeared and become popular when “blah blah was good enough for us when I was growing up” is more about mental flexibility than a technical prowess from a bygone era.
I think music is a great indicator of this mental elasticity as we age. If you can like newer music, understand why younger generations like it, and can even see the influences for those artists/bands that led to their sound you’re probably going to be able to adapt and comprehend newer societal changes, which include technology.
Shes right you know. All this has just proven that there are no technological reasons to stop this. Only financial ones
...Apple is working with RCS to provide encryption, which RCS does not presently have. As a reminder, Google/Android has adopted RCS and worked with the group in charge of it for years, and never once tried to add a message encryption standard to it.
Where do you come up with these proclamations, from your vivid imagination? You very obviously don't look to see if it's true before making them. Google announced message encryption coming to RCS in 2019.
When Google bought Jibe in 2016 and joined the GSMA they started prodding ATT, Verizon, etc to come together on features and standards, with encryption being one of those features. With Google needing carrier support for Android they tried to work WITH the carrier-led GSMA and not rocking the boat too much, and the carriers were seemingly welcoming Google's membership, even adding Google RCS services to the standard. https://www.gsma.com/newsroom/press-release/global-operators-google-and-the-gsma-align-behind-adoption-of-rcs/
Well so much for that.
Just three years later it was obvious not rocking the boat wasn't going to work to move things along. The lack of action from carriers, including resisting encryption for selfish monetary reasons, pushed Google into taking it into their own hands, expanding the footprint with user-friendly features, and adding E2EE themselves since the carriers would not. IMO, left to themselves, ATT, et.al. never would have done so.
If GSMA eventually makes E2EE mandatory, it will be largely because of Google. I'm not convinced Apple is interested in pushing for it, not bothering to join the standards working group AFAICT, so how are they working with them to add encryption? They're only getting on the boat, not joining the bridge crew based on appearances. Their pinky promise to adopt RCS "next year" was done last minute to avoid the EU from regulating iMessage IMO, and it might succeed, but E2EE RCS won't work in their favor from a marketing aspect.
Apple will not admit to any other messaging service having the security and privacy of iMessage, nor should anyone expect them to. Business is business, and you can be certain Google is acting in their self-interests too, even if Google Messages can't be directly monetized any more than iMessage can. Both are just parts of a bigger profit-making package.
Google proposed E2EE on RCS is only possible with Google proprietary RCS. Which requires carriers to the use Google Jibe Mobile servers and Google Messages. Google wants Android users to have to use Google Messages as their default messaging service, when they "help" the mobile networks adapt Google proprietary RCS as the standard. So far, all the other over a dozen attempts by Google to develop a messaging service on Android, has failed (in gaining market share from competitors). And Google has so far, not allowed any other messaging service (except Samsung Messages) to have RCS with E2EE.
Apple on the other hand, wants to help with establishing a standard E2EE with RCS, that don't require the use of Google Jibe Mobile servers or Google Messages. Apple wants it so that any messaging service, can send and receive messages with E2EE RCS, to and from any other messaging service, without either of them requiring to use Google Jibe Mobile servers or Google Messages as the client on the mobile phone. That is a different, a more difficult and a more noble goal, than what Google is doing in "helping" the mobile network industry make Google proprietary E2EE RCS the standard and Google Messages the default on Android.
Google main goal is not to make RCS more like how the standard SMS is now but to have Google Messages on Android more like how iMessage is on iOS.
Shes right you know. All this has just proven that there are no technological reasons to stop this. Only financial ones
...Apple is working with RCS to provide encryption, which RCS does not presently have. As a reminder, Google/Android has adopted RCS and worked with the group in charge of it for years, and never once tried to add a message encryption standard to it.
Where do you come up with these proclamations, from your vivid imagination? You very obviously don't look to see if it's true before making them. Google announced message encryption coming to RCS in 2019.
When Google bought Jibe in 2016 and joined the GSMA they started prodding ATT, Verizon, etc to come together on features and standards, with encryption being one of those features. With Google needing carrier support for Android they tried to work WITH the carrier-led GSMA and not rocking the boat too much, and the carriers were seemingly welcoming Google's membership, even adding Google RCS services to the standard. https://www.gsma.com/newsroom/press-release/global-operators-google-and-the-gsma-align-behind-adoption-of-rcs/
Well so much for that.
Just three years later it was obvious not rocking the boat wasn't going to work to move things along. The lack of action from carriers, including resisting encryption for selfish monetary reasons, pushed Google into taking it into their own hands, expanding the footprint with user-friendly features, and adding E2EE themselves since the carriers would not. IMO, left to themselves, ATT, et.al. never would have done so.
If GSMA eventually makes E2EE mandatory, it will be largely because of Google. I'm not convinced Apple is interested in pushing for it, not bothering to join the standards working group AFAICT, so how are they working with them to add encryption? They're only getting on the boat, not joining the bridge crew based on appearances. Their pinky promise to adopt RCS "next year" was done last minute to avoid the EU from regulating iMessage IMO, and it might succeed, but E2EE RCS won't work in their favor from a marketing aspect.
Apple will not admit to any other messaging service having the security and privacy of iMessage, nor should anyone expect them to. Business is business, and you can be certain Google is acting in their self-interests too, even if Google Messages can't be directly monetized any more than iMessage can. Both are just parts of a bigger profit-making package.
Google proposed E2EE on RCS is only possible with Google proprietary RCS.... TLDR
As a sidenote I agree with the OP's opinion that Apple will end up using MLS for messaging interoperability standards and encryption, just as Google has already committed itself to supporting.
IMHO, right now it's still Apple gaming the system to find the minimum they can get by with to avoid EU mandates. Apple announced RCS support "someday" only late afternoon on the very last day they could have before the EU closed the books the next morning on the iMessage investigation and final judgment. To me, that makes their commitment half-hearted IMHO, and offers no assurance they will actively work to include E2EE in the standards. it does not serve Apple's purposes to insist on RCS encryption. Considering the other stakeholders, it aint' happenin' anyway IMO. There's a reason Google had to do so without the GSMA's help.
Doing so keeps the network secure, with Apple claiming the techniques "posed significant risks to user security and privacy."
This would be a more compelling argument if Apple actually restricted iMessage to devices with a hardware certificate they provided. Which is totally technically feasible if they wanted. But they don't and they haven't. All you need to send and receive iMessages is Apple's messages app, which will run on many platforms, including macos running on generic thirdparty hardware. Which Apple doesn't authorize but also hasn't done anything to prevent. So to call excluding Android/Beeper from iMessage a security consideration feels very silly to me. Nevermind "privacy". No, this is completely about Apple wanting to keep their ecosystem exclusive.
Comments
I believe that one's understanding of just about any topic, including communication technology, is driven primarily by a person's curiosity, inquisitiveness, and desire to continue to learn throughout their lifetime. It doesn't matter where or when you started or what's topical at any given point in time because it's only going to change going forward. To keep up and continue feed your curiosity you're always climbing yet another learning curve. It never really stops, well, until you stop breathing or get permanently bogged down in anti-learning and cognitive erosion activities like conspiracy theories and politics.
And before you dismiss the relevance of that experience, remember that you, too, will not look so good when you 900 years old are.
For one to, say, be an nonagenarian and still grasp how and why newer technologies have appeared and become popular when “blah blah was good enough for us when I was growing up” is more about mental flexibility than a technical prowess from a bygone era.
I think music is a great indicator of this mental elasticity as we age. If you can like newer music, understand why younger generations like it, and can even see the influences for those artists/bands that led to their sound you’re probably going to be able to adapt and comprehend newer societal changes, which include technology.
https://www.reddit.com/r/UniversalProfile/comments/1887djp/the_future_of_rcs_up_google_messages_and_interop/
As a sidenote I agree with the OP's opinion that Apple will end up using MLS for messaging interoperability standards and encryption, just as Google has already committed itself to supporting.
IMHO, right now it's still Apple gaming the system to find the minimum they can get by with to avoid EU mandates. Apple announced RCS support "someday" only late afternoon on the very last day they could have before the EU closed the books the next morning on the iMessage investigation and final judgment. To me, that makes their commitment half-hearted IMHO, and offers no assurance they will actively work to include E2EE in the standards. it does not serve Apple's purposes to insist on RCS encryption. Considering the other stakeholders, it aint' happenin' anyway IMO. There's a reason Google had to do so without the GSMA's help.