Hacker News Reader

Comment by esens | Hacker News Reader

Would it actually have more resources that say Apple? I think if Apple can not do it, I am unsure if anyone else could. All supposedly secure smart phones are not, but they are at least obscure.

I think that one should probably buy an Apple (at least they control everything rather than the cobbled together android clones) and disable basically everything except exactly what is needed. At least that reduces the surface area. And keep personal stuff on a separate phone.

View on HN

Apple can do it (create a security focused phone), it just isn't anywhere near what they want to do. The instant security (or privacy for that matter) gets in the way of profit for Apple they will back away.

Apple is actually not in the business of selling the data of their users. They will also risk aggravating large players in favor of improved privacy. A recent example: App Tracking Transparency [1] which makes tracking an opt-in feature to be requested from the user. To no one's surprise users are happily declining when made this offer. Companies like Facebook aren't too happy about it. [2]

[1] https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2021/01/data-privacy-day-at-a...

[2] https://www.inc.com/jason-aten/apples-privacy-update-is-turn...

Privacy and security are related, but distinct. Apple has been pushing privacy, but we're talking about security here. Typically the tradeoffs around increasing security have to do with user experience, something Apple typically does not like to compromise on.

Well, keeping things private certainly rests on the security of devices and protocols. That being said, Apple investing heavily in making security unobtrusive isn't in itself a sign of weak security. A lot of it is just well engineered and thus unseen. But documented in parts for everyone to see: https://manuals.info.apple.com/MANUALS/1000/MA1902/en_US/app...

If I somehow made it seem as I thought Apple sell data then that wasn't my intent (but neither does Facebook or Google sell their data).

However I do believe that Apple is only doing what you describe as a PR move. At the same time Apple fight other's advertising and tracking they are strengthening their own version of this. That users get something good out of it is strictly a side-effect. Promoting Apple because of this is in my opinion worse than promoting Facebook for their behaviour as they don't try to sell it as "protecting their users" as far as I know. Using an Apple phone is likely better than one Facebook had its hands on but the thinking and ethics behind is worse in an Apple product as they are successfully being extremely disingenuous towards their users about protecting their privacy.

Or maybe it's because they're doing their best to make every iPhone the security-focused phone, while not doing anything that would anger the FBI enough to try to pass legislation. When you are that big of a company, the things you can get away with are much more restricted than a small company.

They have already angered the FBI quite a lot during the 2016 San Bernadino case and made their position on the matter clear:

https://www.apple.com/customer-letter/

Yes, a good PR move by Apple. Especially when you can get access by going to someone like NSO instead.

Sure. I'm certain that is a front for Apples bugdoor monetization scheme.

iOS seems the worst solution, like you are forced to used Apple web engine so a bug or zero day in that engine will own all users. Apple would need to give the users the ability to uninstall preinstalled stuff and replaced them with safer or better alternatives.

Plenty of people have "beaten" Apple for security, though oftentimes these hardened phone OSes are only secure through obscurity.

Who?

The parent post is saying that many of these "secure phones" are, on paper, secure - but that's because companies like the NSO Group don't give them much attention. If they did become the focus of attention, they'd probably burst from a thousand leaks.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com