No, but API interoperability with literally anything else would be a damn good start. Right now Apple sues anyone who tries to make a bridge between iMessage and other standards.
How would a third party client guarantee e2e encryption with iMessage?
And by what mechanism was that company enabling that bridge? Did that mechanism store iCloud credentials? Did it encrypt the drives the users iCloud data could have been downloaded to? Did they have access to iMessages in clear text before forwarding them?
I’m not a programmer, but this doesn’t seem hard. The API could specify a cryptographic standard. Third party clients don’t need access to iCloud data, just the API to pass message and attachment content in encrypted form with a standardized handshake.
Why? iMessage is a proprietary platform that Apple invested billions into. Expecting them to have API inter-op is idiotic. It’s not like you can’t text people outside of iMessage. There’s SMS, and people are free to use it. Expecting a “bridge” between two standards for the sake of having a bridge tells me people do not know how any of this works and are just parroting the same stupid arguments put forth by people that, again, do not understand how a technology is planned for, developed and maintained.
If there’s such an appetite, ask the fucking government to set a standard and ask every smartphone operating in the country to comply. It’s really that simple.
Don’t bother mate. Lemmy is a dumpster fire filled with angsty teenagers who hate their green bubble. It’ll be another couple decades before they understand how the world works.
True. I’m fine with the likes of Lemmy/Reddit users not getting it, but in this case, we have a DOJ that thinks this is somehow for them to solve. Law making via litigation is just lazy and moronic imo.
upvoted for you last paragraph. bingo. and i’d love that. all the basic functions should be done to a standard, and a good one to boot. save time, money, and bullshit baby games on all sides.
No, but API interoperability with literally anything else would be a damn good start. Right now Apple sues anyone who tries to make a bridge between iMessage and other standards.
How would a third party client guarantee e2e encryption with iMessage?
And by what mechanism was that company enabling that bridge? Did that mechanism store iCloud credentials? Did it encrypt the drives the users iCloud data could have been downloaded to? Did they have access to iMessages in clear text before forwarding them?
I’m not a programmer, but this doesn’t seem hard. The API could specify a cryptographic standard. Third party clients don’t need access to iCloud data, just the API to pass message and attachment content in encrypted form with a standardized handshake.
What am I missing?
And what data would this client be handling via the API?
Even Signal discourages third party apps for this reason you are indeed missing.
Signal is open source. That’s why they warn against using third party closed source apps which cannot be security audited.
iMessage is a proprietary app that cannot be security audited. An open source alternative would be more secure, not less.
Why? iMessage is a proprietary platform that Apple invested billions into. Expecting them to have API inter-op is idiotic. It’s not like you can’t text people outside of iMessage. There’s SMS, and people are free to use it. Expecting a “bridge” between two standards for the sake of having a bridge tells me people do not know how any of this works and are just parroting the same stupid arguments put forth by people that, again, do not understand how a technology is planned for, developed and maintained.
If there’s such an appetite, ask the fucking government to set a standard and ask every smartphone operating in the country to comply. It’s really that simple.
Don’t bother mate. Lemmy is a dumpster fire filled with angsty teenagers who hate their green bubble. It’ll be another couple decades before they understand how the world works.
True. I’m fine with the likes of Lemmy/Reddit users not getting it, but in this case, we have a DOJ that thinks this is somehow for them to solve. Law making via litigation is just lazy and moronic imo.
upvoted for you last paragraph. bingo. and i’d love that. all the basic functions should be done to a standard, and a good one to boot. save time, money, and bullshit baby games on all sides.