Re: [projectvrm] Why believe Apple?

[Johannes Ernst < >]

Personally, I believe that Tim Cook is sincere. I think he believes what he 
said.

There more interesting question is whether he can have any confidence in his 
own belief.

E.g. consider http://www.heise.de/tp/artikel/5/5263/1.html -- look for the 
word "stunned".

And think of it as the "adversary". How would you go about subverting a 
product? It seems much easier to get some low-level minion to make a few 
little changes to the build process that, say, includes an extra key like 
this article alleges, than to go through the CEO who might as well put up a 
fight, given the resources they can throw at the problem. (unlike the minion)

The only thing I can think of, in terms of avoiding these kinds of things, as 
I said before, is 1. complete openness of source code and build process, 2. 
multiple reviewers residing in multiple, preferably slightly antagonistic, 
jurisdictions.

Cheers, (although it isn't a very cheerful subject)


Johannes.


On Sep 20, 2014, at 3:34, Doc Searls 
<
 >
 wrote:

> This is from a list I'm on: http://bit.ly/1qjFwM0 . Full text below.
> 
> Here's Wikipedia on John Gilmore, who wrote it: 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Gilmore_(activist)
> 
> Doc
> 
>> From: "Dave Farber via ip" 
>> <
 >
>> Subject: [IP] new wiretap resistance in iOS 8? Why we believe apple
>> Date: September 20, 2014 at 7:54:13 AM GMT+1
>> 
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: John Gilmore
>> Date: Saturday, September 20, 2014
>> Subject: Re: [Cryptography] new wiretap resistance in iOS 8?
>> 
>> 
>>>> Quoting from the new iOS 8 privacy policy announced tonight Wed Sep 17.
>>>>> Apple has no way to decrypt iMessage and FaceTime data when itœôòùs in
>>>>> transit between devices. So unlike other companie' messaging>
>>>>> services, Apple doesnœôòùt scan your communications, and we wouldnœôòùt 
>>>>> be
>>>>> able to comply with a wiretap order even if we wanted to.
>>>>  https://www.apple.com/privacy/privacy-built-in/
>> 
>> And why do we believe them?
>> 
>>  *  Because we can read the source code and the protocol descriptions
>>     ourselves, and determine just how secure they are?
>> 
>>  *  Because they're a big company and big companies never lie?
>> 
>>  *  Because they've implemented it in proprietary binary software,
>>     and proprietary crypto is always stronger than the company
>>     claims it to be?
>> 
>>  *  Because they can't covertly send your device updated software that
>>     would change all these promises, for a targeted individual, or on
>>     a mass basis?
>> 
>>  *  Because you will never agree to upgrade the software on your
>>     device, ever, no matter how often they send you updates?
>> 
>>  *  Because this first release of their encryption software has no
>>     security bugs, so you will never need to upgrade it to retain
>>     your privacy?
>> 
>>  *  Because if a future update INSERTS privacy or security bugs, we
>>     will surely be able to distinguish these updates from future
>>     updates that FIX privacy or security bugs?
>> 
>>  *  Because if they change their mind and decide to lessen our privacy
>>     for their convenience, or by secret government edict, they will
>>     be sure to let us know?
>> 
>>  *  Because they have worked hard for years to prevent you from
>>     upgrading the software that runs on their devices so that YOU can
>>     choose it and control it instead of them?
>> 
>>  *  Because the US export control bureacracy would never try to stop
>>     Apple from selling secure mass market proprietary encryption
>>     products across the border?
>> 
>>  *  Because the countries that wouldn't let Blackberry sell phones
>>     that communicate securely with your own corporate servers,
>>     will of course let Apple sell whatever high security non-tappable
>>     devices it wants to?
>> 
>>  *  Because we're apple fanboys and the company can do no wrong?
>> 
>>  *  Because they want to help the terrorists win?
>> 
>>  *  Because NSA made them mad once, therefore they are on the side
>>     of the public against NSA?
>> 
>>  *  Because it's always better to wiretap people after you convince
>>     them that they are perfectly secure, so they'll spill all their
>>     best secrets?
>> 
>> There must be some other reason, I'm just having trouble thinking of it.
>> 
>>        John
> 
> To me it's not about belief, but about placing bets. There is much to 
> un-love about Apple, as John points out above. But there is more, in 
> respect to privacy on one's phone, to un-love about other companies, 
> including Google. Of course, that's arguable, and I'll take points from 
> both sides. But I'd rather trust a company I'm paying for services than one 
> that's selling me and my life to other companies, which is what B2B 
> companies in the personalized advertising business do.
> 
> My own preference, in the long run, is to have good, easy-to-use white-box 
> (general purpose) phones and tablets that meet John's requirements. But we 
> don't have those yet. (On the tablet front, Omie should be one: 
> <http://customercommons.org/2013/04/25/meet-omie-a-truly-personal-mobile-device/>.)
> 
> Meanwhile, Cory Doctorow does a good job unpacking the problem, and the 
> basic conflicts we'll be in for a long time: 
> <http://boingboing.net/2012/08/23/civilwar.html>.
> 
> Doc
> 
>