Trash headline from TechCrunch; the exact statement from Apple was:
> We are not aware of any successful mercenary spyware attacks against a Lockdown Mode-enabled Apple device.
> We are not aware of any successful mercenary spyware attacks against a Lockdown Mode-enabled Apple device.
The key word being "mercenary", which does not rule out first-party spyware.
- can give away your data for free - get hacked by nation-state such as Iran - get hacked by mercenary spyware and not notice
and their statement would still be correct. Now that's an awful lot of qualifiers. Plus that's just what they say.
Apple is digging itself into a hole.
In light of the correct legal interpretation of their words, being only the specific letters, we can see that your interpretation is incorrect.
> They know of a lot of attack attempts
No, their statement says nothing about attack attempts.
> so far they have no reason to believe any were successful
No, their statement says nothing about their belief, only their explicit knowledge. Their statement says nothing about their investigation practices or whether they even attempted to investigate and learn about attacks. Their statement says nothing about non-mercenary attacks.
Their statement is technically correct as long as any successful attacks they know about are not explicitly known to be committed by mercenarys.
That's a good point. The best way not to know about any successful attacks is not to know about any of them. I also can definitively state that I'm not aware of any successful attacks, but for obvious reasons this is a basically meaningless statement. Without more data, it's not clear how meaningful the statement they gave is, and while it probably is more meaningful than mine, it doesn't make sense to jump from what they said to "there have definitively been no successful attacks" based on it.
> No, their statement says nothing about attack attempts.
Exactly, they're keeping the statement brief and correct. They have sent multiple batches of notifications to users on previous attacks.
The statement is clear, covers their primary use case for the product, and I'm sure is legally sound. You're grasping at straws trying to think up ways they can be lying to you. I would be very surprised if you ever have used their lockdown mode with any actual cause.
It is advisable to not grasp at straws to think up ways that highly paid lawyers are not saying exactly the words they have approved. That is literally their job and they are good at it.
If they meant something more expansive they can do so. It is not the public’s job to do it for them while letting them retreat to the legally binding interpretation at their pleasure.
They have very good reason to believe that - shareholders and public perception. Apple maintains image of their phone being secure and that is far from the truth. As long as general public don't know their phones have holes like Swiss cheese, the shareholders will be happy.
At risk of stating the obvious, isn't success "hacked it and no one ever found out (at the time)"? By definition, Apple could probably only be aware of unsuccessful attacks. Though that's not guaranteed either, considering all the myriad failure modes that there must be.