Hacker News Reader

Comment by ruswick | Hacker News Reader

It's not a totally unreasonable complaint given that Apple has a history when it comes to security breaches.

My biggest complain is that they are keeping the old 5GB iCloud limit. It's 2015. 5GB is absolutely nothing in terms of both capacity and cost. People pay $700-$800 for their phones and upwards of $1000 for their MacBooks and are still made to shell out for anything more than an negligible amount of free storage?

I mean, it's not like iCloud is unreasonably-priced. It's actually fairly cheap. But, it just seems weird that Apple is printing billions of dollars a quarter with these very expensive devices and still feels the need to squeak out a few dollars a month extra from iCloud subs.

One would think that, with iWork and OSX going free, iCloud would also move from a paid product to a utility that is just included with the devices.

View on HN

Or that they would offer 32GB as the starting option for their phones, especially considering that their OTA updates don't really work on 16GB phones.

There's a lot that Apple does that makes people go "hmm". But they're a case study in getting some things right enough that nothing else matters.

False - Apple has no significant history when it comes to security breaches.

No large scale breaches are known externally, but they have certainly have had their share of security incidents and poor practices.

http://www.ibtimes.com/apple-icloud-hack-obvious-security-fl...

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2014/10/22/apple-warns-icloud-se...

http://arstechnica.com/security/2013/05/icloud-users-take-no...

"Apple has no significant history when it comes to security breaches."

Seriously?!

http://thefappening.rocks/

You clearly haven't understood that event. There was no security breach of Apple's systems. Specific celebrities were targeted and their personal information was stolen and used to unlock their iCloud accounts.

You have mistaken the level of media coverage (due to the celebrities involved) with the severity of the security issue.

You clearly are redefining security breach not to include severe and consequential types of security breaches. Social engineering attacks that allow accounts to be stolen are a big problem. Just because they can't be patched with a new FreeBSD kernel update doesn't make them unimportant.

Apple needs a system that blocks obvious social engineering attacks anyone could easily use against you based on public records if it doesn't want a reputation for security disasters. Apple has already failed many high profile people and probably lots more regular citizens; it deserves shame for its failure.

Apple has such a system. It's called 2FA. The fact you don't know that doesn't do much for the credibility of your position.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com