A critical iPhone and iPad bug that lurked for 8 years may be under active attack

[Arlen Holder]

FACT:
Yet more incontrovertible proof of insufficient iOS testing for a decade!
o MARKETING claims of security vs the Apple reality are completely different.

Dateline today...(everything below is verbatim fact as reported):

o Apples default Mail app for the iPhone has a severe security flaw
<https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/22/21231454/apple-iphone-zero-day-exploit-security-flaw-mail-app-ios-zec-ops>
"The exploit has existed for almost 10 years"
"Security researchers say the iPhone has a severe flaw in the native
iOS Mail app that makes it vulnerable to hackers"
"all it requires to remotely execute code on a victim's iOS device is
for the Mail app to receive the email and for the victim to open
the message"

o A critical iPhone and iPad bug that lurked for 8 years may be under active attack
<https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2020/04/a-critical-iphone-and-ipad-bug-that-lurked-for-8-years-is-under-active-attack/>
"Malicious emails require little or no interaction;
exploits active since at least 2018"
"the full scope of abuse of this vulnerability is enormous"
"To prevent attacks until Apple releases a general-availability patch,
users can either install the beta 13.4.5 or use an alternate email app
such as Gmail or Outlook"

o You've Got (0-click) Mail!
<https://blog.zecops.com/vulnerabilities/unassisted-ios-attacks-via-mobilemail-maild-in-the-wild/>
"The vulnerabilities exist at least since iOS 6
(issue date: September 2012) when iPhone 5 was released
The earliest triggers we have observed in the wild were
on iOS 11.2.2 in January 2018"

o Newly disclosed iPhone vulnerability means emails are an even bigger risk
<https://mashable.com/article/apple-ios-iphone-email-vulnerability/>
"And here's the real kick to the guts: In some cases, you don't even
have to be tricked into opening the email. The damage is done simply
by your phone downloading the malicious email in the background."

iPhone's Mail app has two severe "zero-click" vulnerabilities that have existed for 8 years
<https://www.techspot.com/news/84947-iphone-mail-app-has-two-severe-zero-click.html>
"A fix is coming in iOS 13.4.5"
"Apple's iOS 13 has received several bug fixing updates in its six month
lifespan so far, among the most notable: a patch that addressed killing
of background apps, another that drained your battery for no apparent
reason, one that prevented from using the camera, or track your precise
location even if you had expressly disabled that in settings. These new
vulnerabilities however sound considerably more serious."

o iPhone Mail app zero-day exploits found in the wild
<https://9to5mac.com/2020/04/22/report-iphone-mail-app-zero-day-exploits-found-in-the-wild-apple-has-fix-coming-in-next-public-ios-release/>
"The zero-click exploit works through the default iOS Mail app
and is potentially dangerous as a user doesn't need to tap
or click anything to have their device compromised. The vulnerability
allows remote code execution capabilities and enables an attacker to
remotely infect a device by sending emails that consume significant
amount of memory. ZecOps says that it has discovered evidence of the
attacks being used in the wild and believes them to be widely exploited"
--
Bringing truth to this newsgroup: one undeniably obvious fact at a time.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-22 8:34 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> FACT:
> Yet more incontrovertible proof of insufficient iOS testing for a decade!

So in your mind, any time a bug is found that is incontrovertible proof
of insufficient testing?

Does that apply to all software manufacturers...

...or just Apple?

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :

> So in your mind, any time a bug is found that is incontrovertible proof
> of insufficient testing?

Hi Alan Baker,

Think.

Think about Apple's constant claims of ungodly (yet imaginary) security.
o Think. Keep thinking Alan, and it will come to you why this matters.

This matters Alan.
o A lot.

You need to think like an adult to know why Apple security is important.
o *You have to understand that Apple MARKETING loudly touts security.*

It's literally _why_ many people _buy_ these high-priced phones, Alan.
o Until you comprehend this basic fact, you'll _never_ understand truth.

HINT: The loudly touted "security" on iOS is purely imaginary, Alan.
o It's far easier to tout security on billboards than to really attain it.

It's clear, to me, Apple spends MILLIONS yearly touting the mere _illusion_
of security, where I would simply ask Apple to spend some of that MARKETINg
budget on actually _delivering_ it.

This will NEVER happen, by the way...
o You know why?

I do.
o Apple customers just want to _feel_ safe, it seems.

They _believe_ MARKETING more than they believe in actual facts.
o We've proved that a fact time * again, Alan, on this very newsgroup.

Even Google easily proved Apple has _never_ tested iOS sufficiently.
o This is yet more proof that Apple doesn't test iOS sufficiently.
--
It's far easier for MARKETING to tout security than for Apple to deliver.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-22 8:46 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :
>
>> So in your mind, any time a bug is found that is incontrovertible
>> proof of insufficient testing?
>
> Hi Alan Baker,
>
> Think.
> Think about Apple's constant claims of ungodly (yet imaginary) security.

I haven't seen any such claims.

Got a quote?

> o Think. Keep thinking Alan, and it will come to you why this matters.
>
> This matters Alan. o A lot.

Software bugs DO matter.

Do you ever post anywhere about any bugs other than Apple's?

Yes or no.

It's really a very simple question...

...but you won't answer it.

[None]

Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote:
> On 2020-04-22 8:46 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
>> In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :
>>
>>> So in your mind, any time a bug is found that is incontrovertible
>>> proof of insufficient testing?
>>
>> Hi Alan Baker,
>>
>> Think.
>> Think about Apple's constant claims of ungodly (yet imaginary) security.
>
> I haven't seen any such claims.
>
> Got a quote?
>

We all know that Arlen invents facts to support his crusade while ignoring
anything that is actually a systematic problem for all phone manufacturers.


Life has been so much more peaceful once I killfiled his vitriol, but I am
going to start killfilling people who insist on responding to him, I have
had enough of his nonsense.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :

> I haven't seen any such claims.
>
> Got a quote?

Hi Alan Baker,

The whole point is that Apple MARKETNING lies about privacy & security.
o It's easy to "claim" privacy & security; it's harder to deliver it.

And Apple does not deliver it (neither does Google nor Microsoft).
o But they don't paint entire building walls with their ungodly claims.

You can't possibly be serious that you don't realize Apple incessantly
loudly proclaims they're the smartphone supplier for privacy & security.

Here's just _one_ of many articles on how Apple lies about the topic:
o Macworld: Apple┬ iPhone privacy billboard is a clever CES troll,
but it┬ also inaccurate
<https://www.macworld.com/article/3331597/apple-privacy-billboard.html>
"What happens on your iPhone doesn┤ always or automatically stay there"

What you apologists are _immune_ to is the simple facts
o Apple loudly & incessantly touts privacy & security

And _that_ is why when they're not either, it's _different_ than Android.
o But you apologists will never succumb to adult logic & reason.

> Do you ever post anywhere about any bugs other than Apple's?

Are you that desperate to apologize for Apple's huge flaws, Alan?

Only apologists don't realize I post bugs on _all_ the OS's I own.
o Linux
o Windows
o Android
o And iOS

I do it all the time Alan Baker.
o I speak facts about Microsoft & Canonical & Google for Christs' sake.

What's amazing is how you apologists are so desperate for an excuse.
--
Apologists are always shocked that people speak facts about all OS's.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what None <som...@hotmail.com> wrote :

> We all know that Arlen invents facts to support his crusade while ignoring
> anything that is actually a systematic problem for all phone manufacturers.

Hi None,

*FACTS*

*I _love_ when you apologists post because you prove how your brain works*.
o You can't comprehend even the simplest of well known obvious facts!

o Apple plasters privacy ad on billboard near Las Vegas Convention Center ahead of CES
<https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/01/04/apple-plasters-privacy-ad-on-billboard-near-las-vegas-convention-center-ahead-of-ces>

o Apple took out a CES ad to troll its competitors over privacy
<https://www.engadget.com/2019-01-05-apple-ces-2019-privacy-advertising.html>

o Ahead of CES, Apple Puts Up Billboard Touting Privacy in Las Vegas
<https://www.macrumors.com/2019/01/04/apple-las-vegas-privacy-billboard/>

o Apple trolls tech industry with huge billboard advertising iPhone privacy
<https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/apple-iphone-ces-2019-latest-billboard-privacy-las-vegas-security-a8715556.html>

o Apple trolls CES with a giant dig at Android and Alexa privacy
<https://www.theverge.com/2019/1/5/18169781/apple-google-privacy-troll-billboard>

o Ahead of CES, Apple touts what happens on your iPhone, stays on your iPhone with privacy billboard in Las Vegas
<https://9to5mac.com/2019/01/05/apple-privacy-billboard-vegas-ces/>

o Apple aims privacy billboard at Google¢s controversial smart-city
<https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2019/07/09/apple-aims-privacy-billboard-at-googles-controversial-smart-city/>

o Ahead of CES, Apple Puts Up Billboard Touting Privacy in Las Vegas
<https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/ahead-of-ces-apple-puts-up-billboard-touting-privacy-in-las-vegas.2163729/page-3>

o Apple trolls competition with huge privacy billboard at this year's CES
<https://proprivacy.com/privacy-news/apple-ces-billboard>

o Apple runs huge billboard touting privacy outside CES show in Las Vegas
<https://macdailynews.com/2019/01/07/apple-runs-huge-billboard-touting-privacy-outside-ces-show-in-las-vegas/>
etc.

> Life has been so much more peaceful once I killfiled his vitriol, but I am
> going to start killfilling people who insist on responding to him, I have
> had enough of his nonsense.

*I _love_ when you apologists post because you tell me how your brain works!*
o You plonk all facts because your belief system has no room for facts.

Your belief system is always based on exactly zero (0) facts.
o You can't handle facts, in fact - and you said so yourself.
--
Apologists always prove to be fantastically immune to facts: by design.

[Joerg Lorenz]

Am 23.04.20 um 09:50 schrieb None:

And I killfile anonymous Trolls like you ... *ROTFLSTC*

[sms]

On 4/22/2020 9:18 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> On 2020-04-22 8:46 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:

>> Hi Alan Baker,
>>
>> Think.
>> Think about Apple's constant claims of ungodly (yet imaginary) security.
>
> I haven't seen any such claims.
>
> Got a quote?

Well this is one rare instance where "Arlen Holder" is correct.

Tim Cook called Android a "toxic hellstew of vulnerabilities," stating
"99% of mobile malware was on Android."

But the reality was that for Android users that installed apps only from
Google Play, and that did not root, the level of malware was essentially
zero. When you included rooted devices, and devices that had apps
installed from third party app stores (of which there are over 300 in
China), the number rose to about 1.25%.
<https://www.businessinsider.com/google-report-on-android-malware-and-security-2015-4>.
Cooks statement was made six years ago, and since then Android's
security has increased greatly. A determined Android user can still
install apks from unknown sources with malware while it's a lot harder
for an iPhone user to do so.

Tim Cook was probably correct when he said that 99% of mobile malware
was on Android but that was a misleading statement because that 99% was
still an extremely low number in terms of actual infections. In 2019
Android shipments accounted for 86.1% of smart phone shipments
<https://www.idc.com/promo/smartphone-market-share/os> so you'd expect a
higher level of malware occurrences just based on volumes, plus Android
is a much more attractive target due to its much higher market share.

Now some security experts claim that Android is actually more
secure:"“Right now, we’re getting into iPhones," Detective Rex Kiser, a
digital forensic examiner for the Fort Worth Police Department, was
quoted as saying. "A year ago we couldn’t get into iPhones, but we could
get into all the Androids. Now we can’t get into a lot of the Androids.”
<https://www.notebookcheck.net/Cybersecurity-experts-Android-phones-may-now-be-more-secure-than-iPhones.452553.0.html>.

[nospam]

In article <r7s9gj$mut$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> But the reality was that for Android users that installed apps only from
> Google Play, and that did not root, the level of malware was essentially
> zero.

completely false.

<https://www.forbes.com/sites/kateoflahertyuk/2019/10/24/new-google-andr
oid-malware-warning-issued-to-8-million-play-store-users/>
Google¹s Android Play Store is increasingly under fire for allowing
malware ridden apps to plague its users. But another warning has
been issued to Android users after researchers at ESET discovered
a year-long campaign that saw 8 million installs of adware delivered
through 42 apps.

<https://www.engadget.com/2020-03-24-google-security-android-malware-pla
y-store.html>
Google may have introduced a number of security measures to
prevent malicious apps from appearing in the Play Store, but they're
not watertight. New analysis from Check Point shows that earlier this
year, malware was lurking within 56 apps that had been downloaded
almost one million times worldwide ­ its objective, to commit mobile
ad fraud.

<https://9to5google.com/2019/09/10/google-removes-malware-apps/>
The Google Play Store is having a tough time at the moment with
malware-filled apps and sketchy developer practices. Google has
again removed 24 more malware-heavy apps from the Google Play
Store with almost 500,000 downloads as it tackles the problem on its
online app marketplace.

<https://us.norton.com/internetsecurity-emerging-threats-hundreds-of-and
roid-apps-containing-dresscode-malware-hiding-in-google-play-store.html>

Hundreds of malicious apps are showing up on the Google Play
Store, disguised as legitimate applications. These malicious apps
are carrying malware known as Dresscode. Dresscode is designed to
infiltrate networks and steal data. It can also add infected devices
to a Botnet, which is capable of carrying out denial-of-service
(DDoS) attacks as well as taking part in spam email campaigns.

<https://www.techradar.com/news/beware-the-unkillable-android-malware-lu
rking-on-third-party-app-stores>
Security experts are warning Android users about a particularly nasty
strain of malware that's almost impossible to remove.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote :

> Well this is one rare instance where "Arlen Holder" is correct.

Hi Steve,

Stop incessantly proving you own the mind of a small child, Steve.
o Just stop it.
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/P5b1Ujau6iU/5RZigzAKAwAJ>

I get it that apologists _hate_ facts about Apple products.
o They _hate_ that the product isn't what MARKETING claimed it was.

Leave that childishness to the child-like Apple apologists, Steve.
o I _expect_ people like you (& badgolferman), to act like an adult.

I assume you graduated from at least an undergraduate curriculum...
o Which, if true, means you _can_ comprehend slight bits of detail.

What you clearly disagree with are my "assessments" of fact, IMHO.
o But yet you repeatedly "claim" that my "facts" are wrong.

If you are intelligent, Steve, you'll comprehend the difference.
o If you're an apologists, you'll _never_ comprehend the difference.

FACT:
In decades of posting to Usenet, my facts have _neve_ once been wrong!
o Once in a while the facts change - so the assessments change.

But the facts have _never_ even once in decades of posting, been wrong.

Clearly that's a fact - so why do you state that they're wrong?
o Clearly, you confuse the difference between a fact & an assessment.

They are quite different things, Steve:
o A fact is a fact (all adults agree on facts - it's what adults do).
o An assessment of that fact is where adults can disagree.

Example of a fact:
o The number of CPU cores in my Moto G7 is 8.
Example of an assessment:
o This matters or this doesn't matter, for performance.

Steve,
There are almost zero adults on this newsgroup (that's an asssessment based
on facts); please stop proving you are in the apologists group.

Please use your college education, even if it's only an undergrad
education, and begin to comprehend these are two different things:
1. Fact (all adults agree on facts because, well, because they're facts)
2. Assessments (adults often disagree on assessments).

Here's another example where you got your facts wrong, Steve:
a. You claimed Apple Qualcomm royalties went down per phone.
b. I proved they went up (simply by comprehending the cites).

Now here's an assessment of those facts:
a. Apple "surrendered" to Qualcomm.

Steve, the reason this is important is you repeatedly claim that my facts
are wrong in many cases (you said almost half the time, in fact), where my
facts are never wrong (unless the facts change over time, which sometimes
happens when new information is published).

My facts are almost never wrong, Steve.
o That's because they're facts.

What you confuse is the difference between fact & assessment.
o Steve claims Arlen is only 60% correct where Arlen is 100% correct on material facts
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/u7yQ959XPRU/a9jvGbXfAwAJ>
--
Apple owners prove they can't tell the difference between fact & fiction.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote :

> completely false.

There is an ADULT concept in this thread:
o *The point is Apple claims to be holier than thou; & yet, they're not.*

The facts are that we showed cites from reliable hackers (oxymoron?)
stating that Android pentests are more expensive than iOS pentests, simply
because of the glut of iPhone vulnerabilities in the market today.

We provided statements from the hackers saying a fully-patched Android is
far harder to crack into than a fully-patched iOS device.

Bear in mind even Celebrite claims Checkm8 alone, in and of itself, is a
huge wide open door into almost all iPhones extent.

Bear in mind, Android has vulnerabilities too, but that's _not_ the point.
o *THE POINT IS APPLE CLAIMS IT IS FAR SAFER; AND YET, IT'S NOT*.

I don't expect any Apple apologist to comprehend _that_ is the point.
o But I do expect adults on this newsgroup, if any, to comprehend it.
--
Apple loudly claims to be safer, which is mostly MARKETING & little fact.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-23 1:04 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :
>
>> I haven't seen any such claims.
>>
>> Got a quote?
>
> Hi Alan Baker,
>
> The whole point is that Apple MARKETNING lies about privacy & security.
> o It's easy to "claim" privacy & security; it's harder to deliver it.

That's not a quote from Apple claiming "ungodly security. "

>
> And Apple does not deliver it (neither does Google nor Microsoft).
> o But they don't paint entire building walls with their ungodly claims.

That's not a quote from Apple claiming "ungodly security. "

> You can't possibly be serious that you don't realize Apple incessantly
> loudly proclaims they're the smartphone supplier for privacy & security.

That's not a quote from Apple claiming "ungodly security. "

>
> Here's just _one_ of many articles on how Apple lies about the topic:

> o Macworld: Apple¢s iPhone privacy billboard is a clever CES troll,  but
> it¢s also inaccurate
> <https://www.macworld.com/article/3331597/apple-privacy-billboard.html>
>  "What happens on your iPhone doesn¢t always or automatically stay there"

That's not a quote from Apple claiming "ungodly security. "

>
> What you apologists are _immune_ to is the simple facts
> o Apple loudly & incessantly touts privacy & security

That's not a quote from Apple claiming "ungodly security. "

>
> And _that_ is why when they're not either, it's _different_ than Android.
> o But you apologists will never succumb to adult logic & reason.

That's not a quote from Apple claiming "ungodly security. "

>
>> Do you ever post anywhere about any bugs other than Apple's?
>
> Are you that desperate to apologize for Apple's huge flaws, Alan?
>

I'm not apologizing for anything.

> Only apologists don't realize I post bugs on _all_ the OS's I own.
> o Linux
> o Windows
> o Android
> o And iOS

Show some quotes.

Show one time you posted a bug for any of those OTHER than iOS

>
> I do it all the time Alan Baker.

That it should be easy.

> o I speak facts about Microsoft & Canonical & Google for Christs' sake.

Yet when asked to quote such facts...

...you never do.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-23 1:13 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what None <som...@hotmail.com> wrote :
>
>> We all know that Arlen invents facts to support his crusade while
>> ignoring
>> anything that is actually a systematic problem for all phone
>> manufacturers.
>
> Hi None,
>
> *FACTS*
>
> *I _love_ when you apologists post because you prove how your brain works*.
> o You can't comprehend even the simplest of well known obvious facts!
>
> o Apple plasters privacy ad on billboard near Las Vegas Convention
> Center ahead of CES
> <https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/01/04/apple-plasters-privacy-ad-on-billboard-near-las-vegas-convention-center-ahead-of-ces>

What claim of "ungodly security" does that make?

>
>
> o Apple took out a CES ad to troll its competitors over privacy
> <https://www.engadget.com/2019-01-05-apple-ces-2019-privacy-advertising.html

That's the same billboard, so same question.

>
>
>
> o Ahead of CES, Apple Puts Up Billboard Touting Privacy in Las Vegas
> <https://www.macrumors.com/2019/01/04/apple-las-vegas-privacy-billboard/>
>

Same billboard, same question.

> o Apple trolls tech industry with huge billboard advertising iPhone
> privacy
> <https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/apple-iphone-ces-2019-latest-billboard-privacy-las-vegas-security-a8715556.html>
>

Same billboard, same question.

> o Apple trolls CES with a giant dig at Android and Alexa privacy
> <https://www.theverge.com/2019/1/5/18169781/apple-google-privacy-troll-billboard>

Same billboard, same question.

>
>
> o Ahead of CES, Apple touts what happens on your iPhone, stays on your
> iPhone with privacy billboard in Las Vegas
> <https://9to5mac.com/2019/01/05/apple-privacy-billboard-vegas-ces/>

Same billboard, same question.

>
> o Apple aims privacy billboard at Google¢s controversial smart-city
> <https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2019/07/09/apple-aims-privacy-billboard-at-googles-controversial-smart-city/>
>

Finally, a different billboard.

But again, it makes no claim of "ungodly security".

>
> o Ahead of CES, Apple Puts Up Billboard Touting Privacy in Las Vegas
> <https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/ahead-of-ces-apple-puts-up-billboard-touting-privacy-in-las-vegas.2163729/page-3>

That's not even the billboard, but a discussion ABOUT the same billboard.

> o Apple trolls competition with huge privacy billboard at this year's CES
> <https://proprivacy.com/privacy-news/apple-ces-billboard>

I guess you feel that's authoritative enough to quote:

'Apple products are generally regarded as much more secure than their
rivals’ counterparts, and the company typically isn’t prone to the same
data leaks and security shortfalls as Google and Amazon. '

>
> o Apple runs huge billboard touting privacy outside CES show in Las Vegas
> <https://macdailynews.com/2019/01/07/apple-runs-huge-billboard-touting-privacy-outside-ces-show-in-las-vegas/>
>

Same billboard.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-23 7:42 a.m., sms wrote:
> On 4/22/2020 9:18 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
>> On 2020-04-22 8:46 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
>
>>> Hi Alan Baker,
>>>
>>> Think.
>>> Think about Apple's constant claims of ungodly (yet imaginary) security.
>>
>> I haven't seen any such claims.
>>
>> Got a quote?
>
> Well this is one rare instance where "Arlen Holder" is correct.
>
> Tim Cook called Android a "toxic hellstew of vulnerabilities," stating
> "99% of mobile malware was on Android."

Which is not a claim that Apple's own security is "ungodly".

>
> But the reality was that for Android users that installed apps only from
> Google Play, and that did not root, the level of malware was essentially
> zero. When you included rooted devices, and devices that had apps
> installed from third party app stores (of which there are over 300 in
> China), the number rose to about 1.25%.
> <https://www.businessinsider.com/google-report-on-android-malware-and-security-2015-4>.
> Cooks statement was made six years ago, and since then Android's
> security has increased greatly. A determined Android user can still
> install apks from unknown sources with malware while it's a lot harder
> for an iPhone user to do so.
>
> Tim Cook was probably correct when he said that 99% of mobile malware
> was on Android but that was a misleading statement because that 99% was
> still an extremely low number in terms of actual infections. In 2019
> Android shipments accounted for 86.1% of smart phone shipments
> <https://www.idc.com/promo/smartphone-market-share/os> so you'd expect a
> higher level of malware occurrences just based on volumes, plus Android
> is a much more attractive target due to its much higher market share.
>
> Now some security experts claim that Android is actually more
> secure:"“Right now, we’re getting into iPhones," Detective Rex Kiser, a
> digital forensic examiner for the Fort Worth Police Department, was
> quoted as saying. "A year ago we couldn’t get into iPhones, but we could
> get into all the Androids. Now we can’t get into a lot of the Androids.”
> <https://www.notebookcheck.net/Cybersecurity-experts-Android-phones-may-now-be-more-secure-than-iPhones.452553.0.html>.
>

Probably all true, but irrelevant to supporting "Arlen's" claim.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-23 9:46 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote :
>
>> completely false.
>
> There is an ADULT concept in this thread:
> o *The point is Apple claims to be holier than thou; & yet, they're not.*

Goalpost move. This was about you saying Apple has claimed "ungodly
security" (and I think you actually meant "godly").

>
> The facts are that we showed cites from reliable hackers (oxymoron?)
> stating that Android pentests are more expensive than iOS pentests,
> simply because of the glut of iPhone vulnerabilities in the market today.

And yet you provide no such quotes...

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :

> Same billboard.

Alan,

They were _intended_ to be the same billboard...

However, to my point of fact versus assessment:
a. The fact is Apple makes these claims (only an apologist could deny that)
b. The assessment is that they're "ungodly".

Adults can reasonably agree or disagree that the claims are "ungodly".
o But no adult can disagree that Apple makes these claims of superiority.

That's why it's important to realize why Apple is _different_...
o Apple makes the claim - but they don't test their software sufficiently.

The fact is it's easier to simply paint a billboard claiming superiority
o Than it is to actually deliver that superiority.

It's why I constantly assess Apple sells the mere _illusion_ of safety.
o And most of you apologists appear to suck up those baseless claims.
--
Apologists can't seem to ever separate facts from assessment of facts.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-23 10:32 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :
>
>> Same billboard.
>
> Alan,
>
> They were _intended_ to be the same billboard...

Great.

>
> However, to my point of fact versus assessment:
> a. The fact is Apple makes these claims (only an apologist could deny that)
> b. The assessment is that they're "ungodly".

That simply wasn't a claim of "ungodly" security, "Arlen" (and you mean
"godly" or "god-like", BTW.)

>
> Adults can reasonably agree or disagree that the claims are "ungodly".
> o But no adult can disagree that Apple makes these claims of superiority.

Apple claims that they aren't in the business of harvesting your data
for profit.

As Google most definitely is.

>
> That's why it's important to realize why Apple is _different_...
> o Apple makes the claim - but they don't test their software sufficiently.

And you literally NEVER post about anything else.

[Arlen Holder]

For the factual cross reference, badgolferman recently posted a thread:
o ios mail app security flaw, by badgolferman
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/YDUVp41jtmU>

The adult topic at hand, IMHO, is the answer to this basic observation:
a. Given Apple loudly incessantly touts their superiority over Android...
b. And given this vulnerability may be as much as a decade old...
c. And knowing the fact of _who_ did not find this vulnerability...

*What do those facts imply about Apple's testing of security on iOS?*
--
Sensible logic and reason is all I ask from the adults on this newsgroup.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-23 10:50 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> For the factual cross reference, badgolferman recently posted a thread:
> o ios mail app security flaw, by badgolferman
> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/YDUVp41jtmU>
>
>
> The adult topic at hand, IMHO, is the answer to this basic observation:
> a. Given Apple loudly incessantly touts their superiority over Android...
> b. And given this vulnerability may be as much as a decade old...
> c. And knowing the fact of _who_ did not find this vulnerability...
>
> *What do those facts imply about Apple's testing of security on iOS?*

That like every single maker of software, they make mistakes.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :

> And you literally NEVER post about anything else.

Alan,

You apologists are so _desperate_ to find something to defend Apple
o That you are literally _immune_ to the fact I post about a lot of things.

You "think" I only post about Apple security, and yet, it's childishly
trivial to prove yo uwrong, in that I post about _many_ things.

Just yesterday, for example, I posted the following... (as just 1 example)
to the rec.photo.digital newsgroup:
o Tutorials for the best free non-cloud Android MMS/SMS apps which handle
photographic images nicely & a concomitant free Wi-Fi/USB LAN MMS image
backup/restore strategy between Android & Windows >
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.photo.digital/_GvMgZVY0IQ>

Here's just that one post, that has nothing to do with Apple, for example.

1. We tested all known Android freeware SMS/MMS texting apps in this
thread, where we paid particular attention to MMS handling of images.
o *What free 0-advertisement phone/sms-mms/contact integrated app do you use?*
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/comp.mobile.android>

2. We tested many (but not all) SMS/MMS freeware backup apps in a bunch of
threads (see history below), mainly concluding in this thread a solution:
o *What free non-root Android backup & restore solution do you recommend for general use?*
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/jZ8IxxgXFys/4czl4hg2AwAJ>

These are some of the many related illustrative images in the tutorials.
o <https://i.postimg.cc/wj0n4P9D/xml06.jpg>
o <https://i.postimg.cc/kXLV3qx9/xml05.jpg>
o <https://i.postimg.cc/26LJtdmC/xml04.jpg>
o <https://i.postimg.cc/MpdL7JLk/xml03.jpg>
o <https://i.postimg.cc/dtDwkn3V/xml02.jpg>
o <https://i.postimg.cc/L5WsCrNq/xml01.jpg>
o <https://i.postimg.cc/vmSszLd2/webdav06.jpg>
o <https://i.postimg.cc/dVzyqySQ/webdav05.jpg>
o <https://i.postimg.cc/Vk5qs1fg/webdav04.jpg>
o <https://i.postimg.cc/d0kj6Fg3/webdav03.jpg>
o <https://i.postimg.cc/6pHMzY3j/webdav02.jpg>
o <https://i.postimg.cc/RCn2h5FM/webdav01.jpg>

After extensive tests, for MMS image purposes, we concluded this the best:
o *Pulse SMS* (Phone/Tablet/Web), by Klinker Apps, Inc
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=xyz.klinker.messenger>

And, for MMS image backup/restore purposes, this "may" be a good choice:
o *SMS Backup & Restore*, by SyncTech Pty Ltd
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.riteshsahu.SMSBackupRestore>

The details are gory, so I simply point you to related recent threads on
the topic which contain far more detail for those wanting this capability.
o *NEW PHONE!*, by The Real Bev
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/d0Y8CqDTaog/SHkYgRc2AwAJ>
o *Tutorial: How to back up non-root Android apps and their data over Wi-Fi using Helium freeware on Windows*
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/ZUEJUrPrEog>
o *Tutorial: How to connect Android to Windows as a drive letter over a Wi-Fi LAN for free simple reliable bidirectional copy*
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/9Lu2_dPsu6o>
o *What's a decent XML editor specifically for editing/viewing SMS messages copied from Android to Windows?*
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.text.xml/bNiXNvXiU4k>
o *Android to Windows*
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/uk.telecom.mobile/Wluxln3nP1w>
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/xwX8S7XW-p0>
o *What free non-root Android backup & restore solution do you recommend*
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/jZ8IxxgXFys>
o *Do you know of a free Android SMBv2 (or SMBv3) client?*
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/tl3Q05QGyAw/yBV1yLArCAAJ>
o *What's the best way to forward SMB TCP port 445 to above 1024 on Windows?*
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/3QQ8bAZeXNI/p7yqvwHrBQAJ>
o *Want Windows LAN viewer to open share on Android*
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/XxuCDi4jkbc/5E5HS_QVBQAJ>
o *Tutorial to run any Windows command directly on Android over either USB or Wi-Fi*
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/JrWLPRYO-TU/2gn6KqccBwAJ>
o *KDE Connect is a keeper for sending & receiving files over your Wi-Fi*
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/4x1rf1JefW8/7EQp2nr-AAAJ>
o *3 WiFi tests of a network location to a drive letter mapping*
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/IswZ5yEcpYA/wWuqoICZBgAJ>
o *How to debug flaky Android-to-Windows FTP connection in Windows File Explorer?*
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/XFtsfaPAqFA/KQzDY3QtAwAJ>
o *What do you use to copy files from Windows XP to Android over WiFi?*
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/OkDfuDN9fZU/mFAMnIPGFQAJ>
o *Accessing a Windows shared folder from Android using SMB*
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/Hb5IAnebQmQ/Mc04bs0ZAAAJ>
o *How to get a Windows File Explorer Wi-Fi connection to Android*
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/ZTg_HVub8ho/2O2X-sAqAgAJ>
o *Do people of reasonable technical ability store their private data on the Internet (if so, for what gain?)*
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/mBIZ-8jGdmk/aLDJkSJQAAAJ>
etc.

Please add additional value where you can for Android MMS image handling.
--
Every Usenet thread should strive to purposefully helpfully add value.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :

> That like every single maker of software, they make mistakes.

Alan Baker,

I realize you're an apologist as you're fantastically _immune_ to facts.
o But the facts remain that Apple loudly touts security over Android.

That's a fact only you apologists would even attempt to deny.

Hence, when we constantly easily prove Apple security holes due to lack of
testing, for years (and years and years) on end, it's an indication that:
o *Apple should spend some of that MARKETING budget on actual testing.*

Bear in mind this is the umpteen time we proved Apple doesn't test iOS (or
iTunes) for years on end, for even the simplest obvious bugs (even bugs
that they previously fixed for God's sake).

My assessment of the facts, is simple, and one an adult would understand:
*Apple should spend some of that MARKETING budget on actual testing.*
--
Apple apologists seem to hate that Apple isn't what MARKETING claims it is.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-23 10:56 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :
>
>> And you literally NEVER post about anything else.
>
> Alan,
>
> You apologists are so _desperate_ to find something to defend Apple o
> That you are literally _immune_ to the fact I post about a lot of
> things.
>
> You "think" I only post about Apple security, and yet, it's
> childishly trivial to prove yo uwrong, in that I post about _many_
> things.

I think you only CRITICIZE Apple.

>
> Just yesterday, for example, I posted the following... (as just 1
> example) to the rec.photo.digital newsgroup: o Tutorials for the best
> free non-cloud Android MMS/SMS apps which handle photographic images
> nicely & a concomitant free Wi-Fi/USB LAN MMS image backup/restore
> strategy between Android & Windows >
> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.photo.digital/_GvMgZVY0IQ>
>
> Here's just that one post, that has nothing to do with Apple, for
> example.

It's not critical of anyone, Arlen.

You are a liar.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-23 11:03 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :
>
>> That like every single maker of software, they make mistakes.
>
> Alan Baker,
>
> I realize you're an apologist as you're fantastically _immune_ to facts.
> o But the facts remain that Apple loudly touts security over Android.

You've yet to show an example of that.

Apple touts privacy, and quite loudly...

...because Apple isn't in the business of selling you to advertisers.

Google (the maker of Android) is in that business.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :

> ...because Apple isn't in the business of selling you to advertisers.

You apologists are _desperate_ to find a red herring to deflect from the
fact that this bug, which existed for at least 8 years, wasn't found by
Apple, but by someone else (and it's cited to be exploited in the wild).

That's an obvious fact that you apologists appear to _hate_, Alan Baker.
o Hence, I assess that's why you're so desperate to change the narrative.

As per your [changed] narrative, just read factual _cites_ in this article:
o *Washington Post: Apple promises privacy, but 5,400 hidden iPhone apps*
*secretly share your data with trackers, ad companies, & research firms*
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/J_YuCzdGTGI/XgCjxKxKBwAJ>

In summary, Apple loudly touts the mere _illusion_ of privacy over Android.
o *Maybe Apple should spend some of that MARKETING budget on delivering it*
--
Apologists very often boldly deny facts without even _reading_ them first!

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :

> Show one time you posted a bug for any of those OTHER than iOS

*What's shocking about you strange apologists is how you're so utterly*
*_desperate_*
*to fabricate a narrative that fits your (purely imaginary) belief systems*.

Everyone (but you) knows, for example, that I constantly post about
the privacy flaws of both Google and Microsoft (for God's sake).

For example, just with Google alone...
(This list can go on forever - all of which is fact Alan Baker is _immune_ to!)

o 25 Million Android Phones Infected With Malware That ĄHides In WhatsAppĒ
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/f30gBr1XB70/aK2loX8RCwAJ>

o Forbes: Fake Google Android Apps Are Actually Russian Spy Tools
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/7hT3ijiHlSs/yIqEZW2KCgAJ>

o AndroidPolice says the latest Google Play Services 18.3.82 has a battery drain problem
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/GlVJVAPIzjA/FUZphyUKDAAJ>

o Why would anyone NEED to set up the Android OS to a Google Account?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/0O0GLU0bFmw/DD095dJ3AQAJ>

o Google keeps a log of all digital receipts emailed to your GMail account.
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/YXRzr1eE6tA%5B1-25%5D>

o What are the common settings to change on an Android 7.0 Nougat phone for privacy?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/b9Ck9JSyKXY/It7Yavl5AgAJ>

o In Nougat, which google apps can we safely DISABLE?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/8rHYBivfNtU/GWsiku14DAAJ>

o What else do we need to do in order to turn OFF reporting to Google my neighbor's wifi access points?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/GHyPnNU60gg/W5iLNI8mAgAJ>

o More reason NOT to have an Advertising ID or Ads on your mobile device based on an expose for the USA & the UK (and others) in the Wall Street Journal today
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/vI0HNkLs0pc/dCxGc4MgBAAJ>

o *Is there a non Google freeware privacy-enabled traffic app?*
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/Ve_2cgliiGk/h1eGlcGTFwAJ>

o Does anyone know how or if Google associates your identity with your Google Map navigation activities?
<>https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/um2niVH0oYU/ZxfDD19uFgAJ

o Do people of reasonable technical ability store their private data on the Internet (if so, for what gain?)
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/mBIZ-8jGdmk/aLDJkSJQAAAJ>

o Warning: Apple, Google Remove ToTok After App Is Classified As A Foreign Spy Tool
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/VBOIbeQ1sjM/sAHxzSUTCAAJ>

o What is the factual truth about PRIVACY differences or similarities between the Android & iOS mobile phone ecosystems?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/FCKRA_3i9CY/B3bkd07xAAAJ>

o GSF independent free, ad free, email programs for Android on Google Play
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/fQPHDg9VutI/8QhMreVoCwAJ>

o Kaspersky Labs reports "CamScanner" contains a trojan (100 million downloads, both iOS & Android)
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/G63rRAIOGjs/Thgu1vk7AAAJ>

o Bluetooth flaw (a single character unlocks encryption) forces Bluetooth specification change
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/95jVER3qsfM/WEToTmUKAwAJ>

o The fantastically brilliant YouYube privacy clones (youtube-dl & New Pipe) have been updated to 0.14.1
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/cWPmSq5r7A4/FVcX7D5UCwAJ>

o What Data Do They Find On Android If One Doesn't Do Texting?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/2Z5aW22MpZo/hBHjbJWOAAAJ>

o Let's document the best known current free REPLACEMENTS for Google "mail" account - so all benefit from our efforts
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/YUdwh4QgoRQ/QAMpsDO8AQAJ>

o How to use Windows to populate your Android phone with hundreds of apps without ever enabling Google Play (or F-Droid)
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/IUNBsY5F_Ho/KxjX1DL-AAAJ>

(This list can go on forever - all of which is fact Alan Baker is _immune_ to!)

*What's shocking about you strange apologists is how you're so utterly*
*_desperate_*
*to imagine a narrative that fits your (purely imaginary) belief systems*.
--
Apologists can't fathom adults speak facts about all operating systems.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :

>> The facts are that we showed cites from reliable hackers (oxymoron?)
>> stating that Android pentests are more expensive than iOS pentests,
>> simply because of the glut of iPhone vulnerabilities in the market today.
>
> And yet you provide no such quotes...

Jesus Chris Alan Baker,

*You apologists are _desperate_ to fabricate your (imaginary) narrative!*
o That you brazenly deny obvious facts that no adult would dare deny.

Even nospam & the other apologists don't dispute what is obvious to all.
o Yet, you're _desperate_ to fabricate a narrative that fits your beliefs.

EVERYONE knows that pentests for Android are more expensive than iOS, Alan.
o Everyone but you, apparently.

Everyone knows that exploits abound for both iOS & Android, Alan...
o That is, everyone but you.

Read this, for example, about how almost all iPhones are fatally flawed:
o *A Practical Guide to checkm8*
<https://www.cellebrite.com/en/topics/investigative-techniques/a-practical-guide-to-checkm8/>

You apologists are fantastically immune to the most basic of facts!
o *Why zero day Android exploits cost far more than zero day iOS exploits*
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/9koS-SuRqgw/H-gtUT0fAwAJ>

What's shocking is that you're so _desperate_ to fabricate a narrative:
o *Mobile device security researches discuss frank factual results on*
*hacking iOS & Android devices*
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/2IUCvXzi8k4/5OuYKi73BQAJ>

It's trivial to DESTROY apologists stated belief system, in seconds...
o With facts.
--
HINT: If it takes only seconds to easily DESTROY Alan Baker's narrative,
what does that say about the veracity of Alan Baker's belief systems?

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what badgolferman <REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote :

> Perhaps their testing was the best they could do at the time given the
> knowledge of existing security flaws, or a calculated decision was made
> to address those flaws in upcoming patches since the advertised release
> date was upon them.

Hi badgolferman,

Thank you for acting like an adult in your response, where, it's clear...
o My beef is that people actually _believe_ the Apple MARKETING bullshit.

Bearing in mind that adults never disagree on facts (facts are funny that
way), and yet, adults easily (and often) disagree on the assessment of
those facts, your statements are fair from an adult viewpoint such as mine.

While both iPhones and Android phones are fatally flawed, the 'wrong' I'm
trying to correct is that Apple MARKETING loudly proclaims otherwise.
o And lots of people _believe_ the Apple MARKETNIG loud proclamations!
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/P5b1Ujau6iU/9AhZ6Pr0AgAJ>

And yet, the facts easily show otherwise...

o *A Practical Guide to checkm8*
<https://www.cellebrite.com/en/topics/investigative-techniques/a-practical-guide-to-checkm8/>

o *Why zero day Android exploits cost far more than zero day iOS exploits*
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/9koS-SuRqgw/H-gtUT0fAwAJ>

o *Mobile device security researches discuss frank factual results on*
*hacking iOS & Android devices*
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/2IUCvXzi8k4/5OuYKi73BQAJ>

Hell, even Google proved beyond a doubt Apple never tested iOS sufficiently
(proving it was almost impossible for the code to have been looked at!)
o Apple is officially upset Google exposed the imaginary security Apple
widely promotes
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/C54BNBxZKN8/QMb9aKL_AQAJ>

Even Apple products on Windows were proven to be untested for years!
o A zero-day vulnerability in iCloud and iTunes on Windows PCs allowed
hackers to install ransomware undetected.
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.comp.freeware/hftPQAEZr_g/wE5JBam9DQAJ>

In summary, my beef is that people _believe_ the Apple MARKETING bullshit.
--
Apple should spend some of that MARKETING budget on actual iOS testing.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-23 11:49 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :
>
>> Show one time you posted a bug for any of those OTHER than iOS
>
> *What's shocking about you strange apologists is how you're so utterly*
>                *_desperate_* *to fabricate a narrative that fits your
> (purely imaginary) belief systems*.
>
> Everyone (but you) knows, for example, that I constantly post about the
> privacy flaws of both Google and Microsoft (for God's sake).
>
> For example, just with Google alone... (This list can go on forever -
> all of which is fact Alan Baker is _immune_ to!)

Now.

Quote the words in each where you are actually saying something CRITICAL
OF GOOGLE in the same manner you claim with any flaw you find in Apple's
software.

>
> o  25 Million Android Phones Infected With Malware That ¡Hides In
> WhatsApp¢

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-23 11:24 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :
>
>> ...because Apple isn't in the business of selling you to advertisers.
>
> You apologists are _desperate_ to find a red herring to deflect from the
> fact that this bug, which existed for at least 8 years, wasn't found by
> Apple, but by someone else (and it's cited to be exploited in the wild).

Nope. That fact is what Apple is touting.

The proof that you understand this is that you snipped the relevant text.

>
> That's an obvious fact that you apologists appear to _hate_, Alan Baker.
> o Hence, I assess that's why you're so desperate to change the narrative.

Rebutting your claims isn't changing the narrative.

>
> As per your [changed] narrative, just read factual _cites_ in this article:
> o *Washington Post: Apple promises privacy, but 5,400 hidden iPhone apps*
>  *secretly share your data with trackers, ad companies, & research
> firms*
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/J_YuCzdGTGI/XgCjxKxKBwAJ>

OK. That is the result of choices the AUTHOR made.

>
>
> In summary, Apple loudly touts the mere _illusion_ of privacy over Android.
> o *Maybe Apple should spend some of that MARKETING budget on delivering it*

Apple isn't collecing your data and selling it to advertisers, Arlen,
but apps you CHOOSE to download might do so.

Google via Android IS SELLING YOU.

[Alan Baker]

Where are the quotes from these "reliable hackers", Arlen?

why not post them instead of your screed?

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :

> Google via Android IS SELLING YOU.

Alan,

Everyone knows Google is selling us, which, you'll note, is why I must have
_scores_ of threads, over the years, on the Android ng alone on that topic.

What most people don't seem to know is that the iPhone is fatally flawed.
o It's just fatally flawed _differently_ than is Android fatally flawed.

Worse, most people seem to _believe_ the loud bullshit Apple MARKETING.
o Like those billboards (which were complete and utter bullshit, Alan).

The iPhone is clearly and obviously fatally flawed...
o Just read anything from those who know it well, e.g., Celebrite, for one.

What I bring forth to this newsgroup are the facts about those fatal flaws.
o Which you seem to hate - and yet - they're still facts nonetheless.

In this thread, is a fact that iOS was untested for _years_ on end
o Such that this flaw affects likely BILLIONS of devices out there today.

This isn't a "theoretical" flaw, Alan - this is exploited in the wild.
o And even today, every iPhone out there contains this flaw right now.

Those are facts you choose to utterly despise, Alan Baker.
o And yet the fact you hate facts doesn't change the fact they're facts.
--
Apologists _hate_ that iOS isn't what Apple MARKETING claimed it is.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :

> Quote the words in each where you are actually saying something CRITICAL
> OF GOOGLE in the same manner you claim with any flaw you find in Apple's
> software.

Play your silly games Alan Baker.
o Play.

*The fact is Apple didn't sufficiently test Mail for _years_ on end*, Alan.
o *You _hate_ that fact - I think because it conflicts with your beliefs*

But the fact you hate facts doesn't change the fact they're still facts.

The fact is that I openly criticize security holes in all OS's I own.
o You don't like that fact because you're _desperate_ Alan.

You're desperate because the facts about Apple conflict with your beliefs.
o They conflict simply because you're utterly _immune_ to facts, Alan.

Facts such as these threads I authored on the Windows newsgroups...
(notice Alan Baker claims these threads don't even exist!)
(that's because Apple apologists are desperate for any excuse!)

o For the first time ever, the NSA publicly disclosed a vulnerability - U.S. Government Issues Critical Windows 10 ¡Update Now¢ Alert
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.comp.freeware/XQcv7bMM6Hg/uGSgR7EbEgAJ>

o Newly found unfixable vulnerability in Intel chipsets of the past five years may compromise platform encryption keys
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general/FqLMglRSxlA/7JTfDcckBAAJ>

o Internet Explorer security bug under active attack
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.comp.freeware/2CkeZmZyDOM/ywZ3VlIbEgAJ>

o Firefox 72.0.1 fixes a security vulnerability that is actively exploited
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.comp.freeware/Lb-AxIw3q4M/2O1bnP56DQAJ>

o Privacy, divorcing from Google ... is there ANYTHING you use from Google that we can't replace with freeware?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general/bBLNT6DyRjY/kb18gX5fBQAJ>

o Do any Windows freeware apps habitually access the private contents of the clipboard upon mere invocation of the app?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general/wDbAqMr-0oY/zm-IGCBpBgAJ>

o Firefox disabled all add-ons because a certificate expired
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general/YH8RMeKLVQg/XDS5V4gOBQAJ>

o Massive chip flaw on Windows Intel & AMD computers
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general/ChtkiVpTp9U/7OuljjIgBAAJ>

o Severe flaw in WPA2 protocol leaves Wi-Fi traffic open to eavesdropping
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general/2c0KfTh-IXY/3X8bRjrJBAAJ>

o What "pointers" would you provide to someone who asks what they should consider doing for privacy/security?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.comp.freeware/Zr1TGTOwMwQ/5EAERIXLBQAJ>

etc. (note that Windows Usenet searches are notoriously more difficult)

The main difference is that people on the adult newsgroups don't
brazenly deny all facts (like you apologists do, without you ever
even comprehending them).

That itself is due to the fact you apologists believe only
in what Apple MARKETING fed you to believe.

On the adult newsgroups, they don't believe a word Microsoft or Google say.
o And neither do I.
--
The difference between Apple ngs & adult OS ngs, is astounding.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-23 2:43 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :
>
>> Google via Android IS SELLING YOU.
>
> Alan,
>
> Everyone knows Google is selling us, which, you'll note, is why I must have
> _scores_ of threads, over the years, on the Android ng alone on that topic.

But never one's where you take Google to task nearly as hard as you take
Apple to task for mere errors.

>
> What most people don't seem to know is that the iPhone is fatally flawed.
> o It's just fatally flawed _differently_ than is Android fatally flawed.

The existence of software bugs does not make the iPhone "fatally
flawed", Arlen.

Google has bad intentions AND bugs.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :

> But never one's where you take Google to task nearly as hard as you take
> Apple to task for mere errors.

Alan Baker,
I already provided evidence of both Google & Microsoft flaws in my posts.
o You don't like that the Apple flaws seem to affect you more greatly.

But I'm done with proving the obvious to you, Alan
o Which is that I report on all the OS flaws that I know about.

We didn't even get to my utter hatred of Canonical's Unity, for example.

Luckily, on 5 April 2017, Mark Shuttleworth announced that Canonical's
work on Unity would end, thank God (it was _that_ horrible, IMHO).

That's why I don't put anything older than Ubuntu 18.04 LTS on my desktop.

>> What most people don't seem to know is that the iPhone is fatally flawed.
>> o It's just fatally flawed _differently_ than is Android fatally flawed.
>
> The existence of software bugs does not make the iPhone "fatally
> flawed", Arlen.

You don't get it, Alan Baker.
o The bugs are severe and they prove iOS was never sufficiently tested.

But the fatal flaws are _different_ than these easily patched bugs.
o *You don't seem to comprehend checkm8 _is_ a fatal flaw, Alan Baker.*

It seems you still can't seem to comprehend this simple adult concept:
a. The iOS security bugs simply prove Apple doesn't test sufficiently.
b. It's the known unpatchable flaws which fatally compromise most iPhones.

Don't you think there's a _reason_ Apple chose the A13 for the 2020 SE?
--
These apologists can't figure out a bug is different than a fatal flaw.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :

> Where are the quotes from these "reliable hackers", Arlen?
>
> why not post them instead of your screed?

Jesus Christ, Alan Baker...
o *You apologists can't even click on a link for heaven's sake*.

*And yet, you brazenly deny even well-known facts out of hand.*
o Without ever even once _reading_ the cites themselves.

That's why you're an apologist, Alan Baker.
o You fabricate your own narrative out of zero (0) actual facts.
--
For apologists, to read an article is already too complex.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-23 4:39 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :
>
>> Where are the quotes from these "reliable hackers", Arlen?
>>
>> why not post them instead of your screed?
>
> Jesus Christ, Alan Baker...
> o *You apologists can't even click on a link for heaven's sake*.

I'm not going searching for the things you could quote instantly...

...if they actually existed.

>
> *And yet, you brazenly deny even well-known facts out of hand.*
> o Without ever even once _reading_ the cites themselves.
>
> That's why you're an apologist, Alan Baker.
> o You fabricate your own narrative out of zero (0) actual facts.

Says the guy who can't provide the actual quotes.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-23 4:33 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :
>
>> But never one's where you take Google to task nearly as hard as you
>> take Apple to task for mere errors.
>
> Alan Baker,
> I already provided evidence of both Google & Microsoft flaws in my posts.

The flaws? Yes.

The way you portray both those companies FOR the flaws is totally different.

[*Hemidactylus*]

Arlen Holder <arlen...@anyexample.com> wrote:
> In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :
>
>> Where are the quotes from these "reliable hackers", Arlen?
>>
>> why not post them instead of your screed?
>
> Jesus Christ, Alan Baker...
> o *You apologists can't even click on a link for heaven's sake*.
>
> *And yet, you brazenly deny even well-known facts out of hand.*
> o Without ever even once _reading_ the cites themselves.
>
> That's why you're an apologist, Alan Baker.
> o You fabricate your own narrative out of zero (0) actual facts.

Well unlike COVID-19 with a raving lunatic POTUS and bootlicking governors
wanting us all to succumb, this threat is pretty easily mitigated. Shut
that shit mail app down and use proper mail dedicated alternatives. Simple
fix. And why look back really? If Apple floated a turd this stinky I’ll
take my punchbowl elsewhere.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :

> The way you portray both those companies FOR the flaws is totally different.

Alan,

You're _desperate_ to imagine a narrative that fits your belief system.

Nonetheless, any adult would agree, I think, on these obvious facts:
a. Apple iOS wasn't tested sufficiently for years on end for this flaw.
b. The flaw exists, even today, on billions of devices out there.
c. The flaw is reported to exist in the wild which makes it very serious.
d. Apple didn't find this flaw - someone else did (as is often the case).
e. Apple will patch this patchable flaw; but the real problem remains.
f. Apple MARKETING will go on loudly touting the _illusion_ of security.

In summary, if Apple merely allocated a small portion of their huge
MARKETING budget to actual iOS testing, this wouldn't have happened, IMHO.
--
Apple doesn't need to test iOS because MARKETING already claimed it's safe.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :

> Says the guy who can't provide the actual quotes.

Any adult would easily observe that I _did_ provide the actual quotes.

You apologists simply brazenly deny them _without_ even clicking the cites!

Anyway, the facts remain as they were at the start of this thread.

a. Apple iOS wasn't tested sufficiently for years on end for this flaw.
b. The flaw exists, even today, on billions of devices out there.
c. The flaw is reported to exist in the wild which makes it very serious.
d. Apple didn't find this flaw - someone else did (as is often the case).
e. Apple will patch this patchable flaw; but the real problem remains.
f. Apple MARKETING will go on loudly touting the _illusion_ of security.

In summary, if Apple merely allocated a small portion of their huge
MARKETING budget to actual iOS testing, this wouldn't have happened, IMHO.
--

Apple doesn't need to test iOS: MARKETING simply tells people it's safe.

[sms]

On 4/23/2020 7:42 AM, sms wrote:

<snip>

> Tim Cook was probably correct when he said that 99% of mobile malware
> was on Android but that was a misleading statement because that 99% was
> still an extremely low number in terms of actual infections. In 2019
> Android shipments accounted for 86.1% of smart phone shipments
> <https://www.idc.com/promo/smartphone-market-share/os> so you'd expect a
> higher level of malware occurrences just based on volumes, plus Android
> is a much more attractive target due to its much higher market share.

It should be pointed out that the 86.1% number is for phone shipments
for 2019. The cumulative market share of Android is less, 72.26%, versus
27.03% for iOS, and the operating system market share includes tablets
whereas the 86.1% number is only for phones.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-24 12:38 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :
>
>> The way you portray both those companies FOR the flaws is totally
>> different.
>
> Alan,
>
> You're _desperate_ to imagine a narrative that fits your belief system.

So present your quotes:

Present a single quote of you actually being CRITICAL of Google for a
flaw in Android.

>
> Nonetheless, any adult would agree, I think, on these obvious facts:
> a. Apple iOS wasn't tested sufficiently for years on end for this flaw.

Where have you ever said something similar about Google.

> b. The flaw exists, even today, on billions of devices out there.

Yup.

> c. The flaw is reported to exist in the wild which makes it very serious.

That's an idiotic statement. Of COURSE it exists in the wile.

> d. Apple didn't find this flaw - someone else did (as is often the case).

Cite for that please...

> e. Apple will patch this patchable flaw; but the real problem remains.

Really? What is that?

> f. Apple MARKETING will go on loudly touting the _illusion_ of security.

So it's an "illusion of security" if a flaw is found in Apple software...

...but show what you call it when it is a flaw in someone else's software.

>
> In summary, if Apple merely allocated a small portion of their huge
> MARKETING budget to actual iOS testing, this wouldn't have happened, IMHO.

You have no clue what Apple's budget is.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-24 12:38 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:

> In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :
>
>> Says the guy who can't provide the actual quotes.
>
> Any adult would easily observe that I _did_ provide the actual quotes.

Nope.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-23 3:15 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :
>
>> Quote the words in each where you are actually saying something
>> CRITICAL OF GOOGLE in the same manner you claim with any flaw you find
>> in Apple's software.
>
> Play your silly games Alan Baker. o Play.
>
> *The fact is Apple didn't sufficiently test Mail for _years_ on end*, Alan.
> o *You _hate_ that fact - I think because it conflicts with your beliefs*

Nope.

I accept that flaws will be found in software.

>
> But the fact you hate facts doesn't change the fact they're still facts.
>
> The fact is that I openly criticize security holes in all OS's I own.
> o You don't like that fact because you're _desperate_ Alan.
>
> You're desperate because the facts about Apple conflict with your beliefs.
> o They conflict simply because you're utterly _immune_ to facts, Alan.
>
> Facts such as these threads I authored on the Windows newsgroups...
> (notice Alan Baker claims these threads don't even exist!)
> (that's because Apple apologists are desperate for any excuse!)
>
> o  For the first time ever, the NSA publicly disclosed a vulnerability -
> U.S. Government Issues Critical Windows 10 ¡Update Now¢ Alert
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.comp.freeware/XQcv7bMM6Hg/uGSgR7EbEgAJ>

And what was your stated opinion ON Microsoft for having missed this flaw?

Because I read the thread, and you made no statement at all about
Microsoft and the competency of its development efforts.

True or untrue?

>
>
> o  Newly found unfixable vulnerability in Intel chipsets of the past
> five years may compromise platform encryption keys
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general/FqLMglRSxlA/7JTfDcckBAAJ>

And your stated opinion of Intel was...

>
>
> o  Internet Explorer security bug under active attack
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.comp.freeware/2CkeZmZyDOM/ywZ3VlIbEgAJ>

And your opinion on Microsoft was...

>
>
> o  Firefox 72.0.1 fixes a security vulnerability that is actively
> exploited
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.comp.freeware/Lb-AxIw3q4M/2O1bnP56DQAJ>

And your opinion of Mozilla was...

They seem to tout their privacy pretty highly:

"Take back your privacy"
<https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/>

>
> o  Privacy, divorcing from Google ... is there ANYTHING you use from
> Google that we can't replace with freeware?
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general/bBLNT6DyRjY/kb18gX5fBQAJ>

And your stated opinion of Google was...

>
>
> o  Do any Windows freeware apps habitually access the private contents
> of the clipboard upon mere invocation of the app?
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general/wDbAqMr-0oY/zm-IGCBpBgAJ>

And your opinion on Microsoft was...

>
>
> o  Firefox disabled all add-ons because a certificate expired
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general/YH8RMeKLVQg/XDS5V4gOBQAJ>

And your opinion of Mozilla was...

>
>
> o  Massive chip flaw on Windows Intel & AMD computers
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general/ChtkiVpTp9U/7OuljjIgBAAJ>

And your opinions on Intel and AMD were...

>
>
> o  Severe flaw in WPA2 protocol leaves Wi-Fi traffic open to
> eavesdropping
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general/2c0KfTh-IXY/3X8bRjrJBAAJ>
>
>
> o  What "pointers" would you provide to someone who asks what they
> should consider doing for privacy/security?
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.comp.freeware/Zr1TGTOwMwQ/5EAERIXLBQAJ>

Again, in either of those last two, do you criticize any entity for
anything aside from Apple?

>
>
> etc. (note that Windows Usenet searches are notoriously more difficult)

Not for competent people.

>
> The main difference is that people on the adult newsgroups don't
> brazenly deny all facts (like you apologists do, without you ever
> even comprehending them).
>
> That itself is due to the fact you apologists believe only
> in what Apple MARKETING fed you to believe.
>
> On the adult newsgroups, they don't believe a word Microsoft or Google say.
> o And neither do I.

Yet you don't ever call them out in the same manner you call out Apple...

...why is that?

[Arlen Holder]

Alan Baker

> So it's an "illusion of security" if a flaw is found in Apple software...

Hi Alan Baker,

It's clear, Alan, you apologists wish to remain _immune_ to the facts.
o You can't even be bothered to click on the links before denying facts.

Anyway, any adult realizes it's not just this fact that proves the point.
o It's the sum total of the huge number of flaws, Alan, that matter.

Not just this flaw which proves Apple missed this bug for 10 years!

Add the unpatchable flaws in _all_ iPhone processors, from A5 to A11 too.
o Add then the proof Google provided that Apple never tested the iOS code.

Add the scathing expose that Apple doesn't test it's iOS code
o By an Apple engineer, whose remarks nobody has doubted to be accurate.

All these are well cited Alan, so your supreme ignorance doesn't count.
o Besides, many times I've provided you the cites on all these facts.

You don't even click on the links...
o You deny all facts no matter what.

Facts don't fit into your imaginary narrative anyway.
o They never did.

Why are you apologists so unfathomably immune to facts?
o I don't know why.

I suspect facts simply don't fit in your imaginary belief system, Alan.
--
Apple should take a portion of that MARKETING budget & actually test iOS.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :

> Yet you don't ever call them out in the same manner you call out Apple.

There is only one fact in this thread that normal adults need to know...
o *That fact is Apple didn't sufficiently test iOS for _years_ on end*

What part of your argument relates to that rather salient fact, Alan?
--
Apple doesn't need to test iOS because MARKETING already touted it's safe.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-24 12:14 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :
>
>> Yet you don't ever call them out in the same manner you call out Apple.
>
> There is only one fact in this thread that normal adults need to know...
> o *That fact is Apple didn't sufficiently test iOS for _years_ on end*
>
> What part of your argument relates to that rather salient fact, Alan?

The part where that is an UNPROVEN ASSERTION that you conclude about
Apple when you don't conclude the same about other companies that also
have flaws in their software.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-24 12:14 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:

> Alan Baker
>
>> So it's an "illusion of security" if a flaw is found in Apple software...
>
> Hi Alan Baker,
>

> It's clear, ...


...that you'll snip everything you cannot debate?

Yes, that is clear.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-22 8:34 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> FACT:
> Yet more incontrovertible proof of insufficient iOS testing for a decade!
> o MARKETING claims of security vs the Apple reality are completely

Not quite the "FACT" you want to claim:

'HD Moore, vice president of research and development at Atredis
Partners and an expert in software exploitation, told me on Friday:

"It looks like ZecOps identified a crash report, found a way to
reproduce the crashes, and based on circumstantial evidence assumed this
was being used for malicious purposes. It sounds like after he reported
it to Apple, Apple investigated, found out these were just crash bugs,
and that shuts the door on this being actually in-the-wild-exploitation
of a new iOS zero-day.

It could be Apple is wrong, but given their sensitivity to this stuff,
they probably did a decent job of investigating it. Through the
grapevine I heard that the internal security team that handled this
investigation at Apple was pissed off about it, since ZecOps went
straight to press before they had a chance to review."'

<https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2020/04/apple-disputes-report-of-non-click-ios-0day-under-exploit-for-two-years/>

And from the same article:

'Other critics have delivered their critiques on Twitter.

“Looks like you have a real vuln but the evidence of exploitation looks
weak… and no info in your post on post-exploitation chaining to lead to
info disclosure or code execution,” researcher Rich Mogul wrote. “Any
update you can share? Pretty big claim of a no-click mail 0-day being
used.”'

But the first report of this was for you "incontrovertible proof",
wasn't it?

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :

> since ZecOps went straight to press before they had a chance to review."'

Alan,

If they didn't need to fix the 3 issues ZecOps' identified in Mail...
o Why are they fixing them in an upcoming software release...

Occam's Razor... and facts.
o Not your twisted narrative, Alan.

Facts.

You apologists are all alike - and you likely don't even realize why.
o I do realize why - because I've studied you apologists - for years.

You only have 7 responses to facts that you simply do not like.
o One of them is to change the narrative away from the facts.

Apple is a master at changing the narrative.
o You suck at changing the narrative - but that's what you're attempting.

When Apple was caught _secretly_ throttling iPhones, they blamed batteries.
(Note: Apple didn't dispute that the benchmarks were correct.)

When Google proved Apple couldn't possibly ever have tested the iOS code...
o Apple blamed Google for the blunt up-front _way_ Google said that.
(Note: Apple didn't dispute that Google was correct.)

This list of "changing the narrative" is what you Apple apologists do...
o And you probably don't even realize _why_ you do it - it's native to you.

I know why you do it - but I doubt you even realize you're trying it.
o Let alone do you realize why you're so desperate to change the narrative.

The fact is that the bug exists.
o And it affects billions of devices
o And it has been in iOS for many years.

Apple had _ample_ time to test for this but.

Perhaps if they allocated a portion of MARKETING's budget to iOS testing...
o This bug might have been caught almost a decade ago, Alan.

But the fact is MARKETING already proclaimed iOS is safe
o So, in Apple's mind ... there's no need to actually test the software.

People _believe_ only what MARKETING tells them, Alan.
o You don't know that ... but I know that.

It's only when you find out the truth about Apple that you get upset.
-
Apologistgs hate Apple products aren't what MARKETING claimed they were.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-24 10:38 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :
>
>> since ZecOps went straight to press before they had a chance to review."'
>
> Alan,
> If they didn't need to fix the 3 issues ZecOps' identified in Mail... o
> Why are they fixing them in an upcoming software release...

I didn't say they didn't need to be fixed, Arlen.

Bugs should be fixed.

Why did you delete so much of what was written, Arlen?

Like the fact that your "fact"...

...wasn't yet proven to be factual.

(Snipped your deflections.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :

> Like the fact that your "fact"...
>
> ...wasn't yet proven to be factual.

Alan,

FACTS
The iOS Mail bugs exist (based on every article I read, even yours)...
o Even Apple said they will fix the bugs in the upcoming release.

The _salient_ fact is Apple did not find these bugs
o Even though they have been in the iOS code for _many_ years, Alan.

You are so _desperate_ to change the factual narrative
o That it scares me that people like you actually exist.

You don't even realize _why_ you're so desperate to change the narrative.

If Apple is complaining that they didn't get enough time to fix the bugs
o Maybe they should allocate a portion of MARKETING's budget to testing iOS

I understand why they don't do that, Alan, even if you likely do not.
--
They don't _need_ to test iOS since Marketing already proclaimed it safe.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-24 11:09 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :
>
>> Like the fact that your "fact"...
>>
>> ...wasn't yet proven to be factual.
>
> Alan,
>
> FACTS
> The iOS Mail bugs exist (based on every article I read, even yours)...
> o Even Apple said they will fix the bugs in the upcoming release.

A bug exists. No one argues that.

But it turns out that the claim that it is a security exploit rather
than just a bug that causes software to crash is far from proven.

>
> The _salient_ fact is Apple did not find these bugs
> o Even though they have been in the iOS code for _many_ years, Alan.

So?

Bugs exist for many years in lots of companies' software.

>
> You are so _desperate_ to change the factual narrative
> o That it scares me that people like you actually exist.
>
> You don't even realize _why_ you're so desperate to change the narrative.

I'm changing it to the truth.

This is not known to be an exploit.

ONE company claims it is, but has provided no proof.

>
> If Apple is complaining that they didn't get enough time to fix the bugs
> o Maybe they should allocate a portion of MARKETING's budget to testing iOS
>
> I understand why they don't do that, Alan, even if you likely do not.

You claim that Apple doesn't test for bugs at all, Arlen?

Is that right?

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :

> A bug exists. No one argues that.

Alan,

You're so _desperate_ to deflect the narrative from the facts, it's scary.
o e.g., look at the subject line to tell me whether you see the word "may".

More importantly...

How many years has this iOS Mail bugs existed in Apple's code, Alan?
o And did Apple find these bugs that they're now complaining about?

HINT: Apple has a long sordid history of blaming the messenger of facts.
o Apple blamed Google, for example, for proving iOS code couldn't possibly
ever have been tested - and they simply blamed Google for the _way_ they
said it, not for the facts (which Apple did not and could not dispute).

The fact is that iOS is, essentially, easily proven to be untested code.
o Apologists _hate_ that fact (did you even _notice_ iOS 13 bugs, Alan?)

You _hate_ that Apple isn't even close to what MARKETING claims it is.
o That's why you're so _desperate_ to change the narrative from the facts.
--
Apple doesn't need to test iOS given Marketing already proclaimed it safe.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-24 11:25 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :
>
>> A bug exists. No one argues that.
>
> Alan,
>
> You're so _desperate_ to deflect the narrative from the facts, it's scary.
> o e.g., look at the subject line to tell me whether you see the word "may".

And yet you quoted as fact (and you've now snipped it):

'"Security researchers say the iPhone has a severe flaw in the native
iOS Mail app that makes it vulnerable to hackers"
"all it requires to remotely execute code on a victim's iOS device is
for the Mail app to receive the email and for the victim to open
the message" '

>
> More importantly...
> How many years has this iOS Mail bugs existed in Apple's code, Alan?
> o And did Apple find these bugs that they're now complaining about?

I don't know, nor do I care.

>
> HINT: Apple has a long sordid history of blaming the messenger of facts.

Nope.

> o Apple blamed Google, for example, for proving iOS code couldn't possibly

No. They did not do that, and you can't provide actual proof that they did.

> ever have been tested - and they simply blamed Google for the _way_ they
> said it, not for the facts (which Apple did not and could not dispute).
>
> The fact is that iOS is, essentially, easily proven to be untested code.
> o Apologists _hate_ that fact (did you even _notice_ iOS 13 bugs, Alan?)

Again, I ask you directly:

Yes or no: are you claiming that Apple does not test iOS at all?

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :

> And yet you quoted as fact (and you've now snipped it):

Alan,

Do you see the word "say" in your own quote of my quote of what was quoted?

>> How many years has this iOS Mail bugs existed in Apple's code, Alan?
>> o And did Apple find these bugs that they're now complaining about?
>
> I don't know, nor do I care.

FACTS:
a. The bugs have been in the iOS code for _years_ Alan...
b. And Apple did not find them.

Apple only complained that others published that the bugs exist in billions
of devices (which Apple does not dispute because they can't dispute it).

Maybe Apple should take some of that immense MARKETING budget and allocate
a portion of it to actual decent testing of the iOS code, huh?

>> HINT: Apple has a long sordid history of blaming the messenger of facts.
> Nope.

Then you didn't read (or you didn't comprehend) the Google proof of that.

>> o Apple blamed Google, for example, for proving iOS code couldn't possibly
>
> No. They did not do that, and you can't provide actual proof that they did.

Google provided the proof, Alan, not me.
o We discussed this long ago, Alan - you are utterly _immune_ to facts.

Apple didn't dispute the proof that the iOS code was _never_ tested.
(hell, it didn't even work, for God's sake, Alan).

And the code that did work, Google proved was sophmorish - they went into
gory detail so you can blame me for my summary - but you can't change the
narrative Alan - even though you _hate_ the truth.

The reason you change the narrative, Alan - is you _hate_ the truth about
Apple not being even close to what Apple MARKETING told you it was.

But here are the facts (again) although you will likely deny them without
even reading them anyway so it's a complete waste of my time to provide you
a cite to the facts as Google reported on them (and Apple's response).
o Apple is officially upset Google exposed the imaginary security Apple widely promotes
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/C54BNBxZKN8/QMb9aKL_AQAJ>

HINT: You brazenly deny facts without even _clicking_ on the links!

> Again, I ask you directly:
>
> Yes or no: are you claiming that Apple does not test iOS at all?

Are you an idiot Alan?
o Apple clearly didn't catch this bug nor a gazillion bugs we've discussed.

What part of the fact iOS 13 was a disaster, for example, did you miss?
--
Apple doesn't need to test iOS because MARKETING loudly & repeatedly
proclaimed it safe, even years in advance of it even shipping. :)

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-24 11:50 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :
>
>> And yet you quoted as fact (and you've now snipped it):
>
> Alan,
>
> Do you see the word "say" in your own quote of my quote of what was quoted?

You think that excuses you.

You drew your conclusions based on your assumption that it was all fact.

>
>>> How many years has this iOS Mail bugs existed in Apple's code, Alan?
>>> o And did Apple find these bugs that they're now complaining about?
>>
>> I don't know, nor do I care.
>
> FACTS:
> a. The bugs have been in the iOS code for _years_ Alan...
> b. And Apple did not find them.

Yup.

And that is the same for every company that writes complex software.

>
> Apple only complained that others published that the bugs exist in billions
> of devices (which Apple does not dispute because they can't dispute it).

Where was this "complaint"?

Quote it with a reference.

>
> Maybe Apple should take some of that immense MARKETING budget and allocate
> a portion of it to actual decent testing of the iOS code, huh?
>
>>> HINT: Apple has a long sordid history of blaming the messenger of facts.
>> Nope.
>
> Then you didn't read (or you didn't comprehend) the Google proof of that.
>
>>> o Apple blamed Google, for example, for proving iOS code couldn't
>>> possibly
>>
>> No. They did not do that, and you can't provide actual proof that they
>> did.
>
> Google provided the proof, Alan, not me.
> o We discussed this long ago, Alan - you are utterly _immune_ to facts.

I asked for the proof that "Apple blamed Google"...

...and you can't provide it.

>
> Apple didn't dispute the proof that the iOS code was _never_ tested.
> (hell, it didn't even work, for God's sake, Alan).

There was no such proof.

>
> And the code that did work, Google proved was sophmorish - they went into
> gory detail so you can blame me for my summary - but you can't change the
> narrative Alan - even though you _hate_ the truth.

And yet you provide nothing to support your claim.

>
> The reason you change the narrative, Alan - is you _hate_ the truth about
> Apple not being even close to what Apple MARKETING told you it was.
>
> But here are the facts (again) although you will likely deny them without
> even reading them anyway so it's a complete waste of my time to provide you
> a cite to the facts as Google reported on them (and Apple's response).
> o Apple is officially upset Google exposed the imaginary security Apple
> widely promotes
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/C54BNBxZKN8/QMb9aKL_AQAJ>

Sorry, but being upset with the say Google announced something isn't the
same as blaming Google.

>
>
> HINT: You brazenly deny facts without even _clicking_ on the links!
>
>> Again, I ask you directly:
>>
>> Yes or no: are you claiming that Apple does not test iOS at all?
>
> Are you an idiot Alan?

Nope.

Answer the question.

> o Apple clearly didn't catch this bug nor a gazillion bugs we've discussed.

We have not discussed a "gazillion bugs", Arlen...

...but it is telling you want to pretend it.

>
> What part of the fact iOS 13 was a disaster, for example, did you miss?

iOS 13 was not a disaster, Arlen.

To make that claim, you're basically proving my point that you're taking
an allegation and assuming it's fact.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :

>> Do you see the word "say" in your own quote of my quote of what was quoted?
>
> You think that excuses you.

Alan,

You're literally _desperate_ to change the narrative away from the bugs.
o And the obvious and clearly very worrisome lack of iOS testing it proves.

I posted _verbatim_ facts from the cites, which you whooshed on not me.
o The cites say exactly what I said they said.

And Apple does NOT dispute that the bugs exist & are very serious indeed.
o Especially since they impact over a billion devices even today!

On a tool that is significantly in use by many, all the time.

In addition, you continue to whoosh on the SUBJECT line of this thread!
o It _clearly_ says "may", yet you refuse to comprehend what "may" means.

I get it that you're utterly _desperate_ to find an excuse for Apple, Alan.
o It's what makes you an apologist after all.

> iOS 13 was not a disaster, Arlen.

Are you an idiot, Alan?
o Do you have any idea of the security bugs in iOS 13 that _others_ found?

Nobody but an apologist would dare claim iOS 13 wasn't a disaster.
--
These apologists always prove to be fantastically _immune_ to basic facts.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-25 1:46 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :
>
>>> Do you see the word "say" in your own quote of my quote of what was
>>> quoted?
>>
>> You think that excuses you.
>
> Alan,
>

> Yo...


When you stop (quite deliberately) removing all previous context, we can
continue this.

For now, I'll just say that what you call "fact" is often only assertion
or believe.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :

> When you stop (quite deliberately) removing all previous context, we can
> continue this.

Alan,
We covered this before where you're always fantastically immune to facts.
o I'll quote what I respond to; no more, no less.

It's widely documented to be proper netiquette for quoting relevance.

> For now, I'll just say that what you call "fact" is often only assertion
> or believe.

You apologists don't know the difference between a fact & an assessment.
o It's actually _why_ you own Apple products in the first place.

You only believe what MARKETING has fed you to believe.

FACT:
o These bugs are acknowledge by Apple to exist in over a billion devices.
ASSESSMENT:
o This is an important bug.
--
Apologists hate Apple isn't what MARKETING incessantly loudly proclaims.
o That's why apologists brazenly deny all facts MARKETING didn't feed them.
o And why apologists incessantly fabricate wholly imaginary functionality.
They _hate_ that APple isn't what MARKETING fed them to believe it was.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-04-25 1:59 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :
>
>> When you stop (quite deliberately) removing all previous context, we
>> can continue this.
>
> Alan,

> We covered this...

No, we didn't.

But I'm quoting what I'm responding to, so it's all good...

...right?

[*Hemidactylus*]

So anyway given the shortcomings of uselessnet I figured out despite this
crappy group how to disable Mail under Passwords & Accounts and for good
measure Cellular Data and Fetch because tinfoil. Is that sufficient or
should the Mail app be entirely deleted as the resident detritus it has
become. Kudos to the first denizen who rises above petty parochial bullshit
to offer a genuinely useful reply.

[Arlen Holder]

Has anyone wondered what's taking Apple so long to roll out the fix?
o I have.

The last time this happened (which happens many times), was, oh, the
FacePalm bug, as I recall... which I was the first to report to this group.
o Apple, when testing FaceTime for FacePalm, found even MORE security bugs
(which were never found in original insufficient testing)
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/BHPp-e77nSM/jEDzQfyOAAAJ>

Do you remember _why_ it took Apple a long time to fix that vulnerability?
o I do.

HINT: They had _never_ tested FaceTime so it was chock full of bugs!

The delay was due to Apple finally, for the first time, _looking_ at the
code, where the delay was that they found a _ton_ of bugs when they did so.

Mark my words, as I have a pretty good record on such predictions.
o I suspect there are _plenty_ more related bugs Apple just found.

Simply because this is likely the first time they ever _looked_ for them.
o Yet another Astoundingly Huge Massive Indiscriminate iPhone Hack
Has Been Going Strong for Two Years! (it never ends)
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/rRzsRZin3c4/TH-TRLUSBgAJ>
--
Apple MARKETING strategy is always of deflection - not testing or fixes.

[Your Name]

On 2020-05-03 15:52:51 +0000, Arlen Holder said:

> Has anyone wondered what's taking Apple so long to roll out the fix?
> o I have.

<snip>

The f'wit troll changes his name yet again. X-(

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-05-03 8:52 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> Has anyone wondered what's taking Apple so long to roll out the fix?
> o I have.

But you only post facts, rigth?

> The last time this happened (which happens many times), was, oh, the
> FacePalm bug, as I recall... which I was the first to report to this group.
> o Apple, when testing FaceTime for FacePalm, found even MORE security bugs
>  (which were never found in original insufficient testing)
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/BHPp-e77nSM/jEDzQfyOAAAJ>
>
>
> Do you remember _why_ it took Apple a long time to fix that vulnerability?
> o I do.
>
> HINT: They had _never_ tested FaceTime so it was chock full of bugs!

HINT: you have no proof of that.

So, NOT a fact.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what *Hemidactylus* <ecph...@allspamis.invalid> wrote :

> So anyway given the shortcomings of uselessnet I figured out despite this
> crappy group how to disable Mail under Passwords & Accounts and for good
> measure Cellular Data and Fetch because tinfoil. Is that sufficient or
> should the Mail app be entirely deleted as the resident detritus it has
> become. Kudos to the first denizen who rises above petty parochial bullshit
> to offer a genuinely useful reply.

I already provided the workaround (with cites), so I simply summarize:
1. Delete Mail, or, at least,
2. Don't "open" it.

Use something else in the interim.
--
It seems Apple has tons and tons of bugs to deal with this week; which is
perhaps why the huge delay (and they likely just started _looking_ at Mail,
which hasn't been tested for years, apparently, and found lots more bugs).

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Your Name <Your...@YourISP.com> wrote :

> The f'wit troll changes his name yet again. X-(

Hi Your Name,

I love when people like you and Jolly Roger & Lewis post.
o You're actually too stupid to _not_ prove you're befuddled by facts.

Of all you apologists, only nospam has the capacity to comprehend fact
o Even as he, himself, doesn't believe a word of what he claims.

It's interesting how the rest of you apologists always prove to be stupid.
o You _never_ cease to prove that you're befuddled by what fools no adult.

See details on how fantastically stupid you always prove to be, over here:
o New vulnerabilities (described as numerous) have been detected in Apple┬ Image I/O
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/RrXonVt7_y0/mcMjF1UqAQAJ>

HINT: Everyone benefits if these worthless pieces of shit stay out of my
threads (i.e., there is negative benefit to _any_ post from Your Name if
it's a response to facts that I post about Apple products or any product).

DOUBLEHINT:
These worthless posts by YourName and similar apologists are always tryint
to refute facts that they simply _hate_.

For an analysis of why apologists literally _hate_ facts about Apple, see:
o Why do apologists like Alan Baker & nospam desperately try to shift the blame of Apple bugs to Google & Microsoft?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/LOQx1Ok-79c/3lMGg-UnAQAJ>
--
Apologists always prove to be like small children in what befuddles them.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-05-04 7:52 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what *Hemidactylus* <ecph...@allspamis.invalid> wrote :
>
>> So anyway given the shortcomings of uselessnet I figured out despite this
>> crappy group how to disable Mail under Passwords & Accounts and for good
>> measure Cellular Data and Fetch because tinfoil. Is that sufficient or
>> should the Mail app be entirely deleted as the resident detritus it has
>> become. Kudos to the first denizen who rises above petty parochial
>> bullshit
>> to offer a genuinely useful reply.
>
> I already provided the workaround (with cites), so I simply summarize:
> 1. Delete Mail, or, at least,
> 2. Don't "open" it.
>
> Use something else in the interim.

Have you managed to find your "workaround" for synching your contacts
across devices...


...because I note that you haven't been able to tell us yet.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :

> Have you managed to find your "workaround" for synching your contacts
> across devices...
>
>
> ...because I note that you haven't been able to tell us yet.

Alan,

Please stop constantly deflecting the topic, which, in this thread, is
about a factual critical bug that lurked for 8 years because Apple never
tested for it (and Apple didn't find, and still hasn't fully fixed).

You _hate_ these facts, and you hate that you fell for Apple MARKETING; so
you try to deflect the thread from any & all these facts you simply hate.

Besides...

Am I even responding to you in this thread?
o I don't remember if you've yet claimed all facts are lies in this thread?

Assuming you haven't yet claimed that all facts you don't like are lies in
this thread, the answer to your question was already given numerous times
in the thread on that specific topic.

You're just too fantastically stupid to even click on the links provided.
o The fact you can't comprehend facts doesn't change the fact they're facts.
--
Sometimes you have to be blunt with apologists... who still don't get it.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-05-04 8:50 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote :
>
>> Have you managed to find your "workaround" for synching your contacts
>> across devices...
>>
>>
>> ...because I note that you haven't been able to tell us yet.
>
> Alan,
>
> Please stop constantly deflecting the topic, which, in this thread, is
> about a factual critical bug that lurked for 8 years because Apple never
> tested for it (and Apple didn't find, and still hasn't fully fixed).

My contribution to the topic is to examine the credibility of the poster
who's making the accusations...

...who claims to post only facts...

...but who clearly posts what are only assertions...

...such as the assertion that "Apple never tested for it".

>
> You _hate_ these facts, and you hate that you fell for Apple MARKETING; so
> you try to deflect the thread from any & all these facts you simply hate.

I don't have facts. How could anyone hate facts?

I don't hate you.

But I do dislike your misinformation tactics.

>
> Besides...
>
> Am I even responding to you in this thread?
> o I don't remember if you've yet claimed all facts are lies in this thread?
>
> Assuming you haven't yet claimed that all facts you don't like are lies in
> this thread, the answer to your question was already given numerous times
> in the thread on that specific topic.

No. That is a lie.

The answer was never given.

The so-called "answer" was cleverly (well, you imagine it's clever I
assume) was actually a series of implications about what you use without
any actual statement that it was what you use.

>
> You're just too fantastically stupid to even click on the links provided.
> o The fact you can't comprehend facts doesn't change the fact they're
> facts.

I also note the thrashing you've recently been doing in the group
comp.mobile.android; trying desperately to find contacts app you can say
you use...

[Arlen Holder]

It seems, as predicted, Apple is up to their ears in 0-day bugs lately...

o * iPhone: a zero-day vulnerability allows spying on your personal data *
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/m_Ljx53NmaU>

The article claims a hacker said he's been using this bug for 3 years,
which, if true, indicates, yet again, Apple doesn't seem to sufficiently
test iOS for years on end...
--
Maybe Apple should allocate some of that MARKETING budget to R&D testing...

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-05-06 8:43 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> It seems, as predicted, Apple is up to their ears in 0-day bugs lately...
>
> o * iPhone: a zero-day vulnerability allows spying on your personal data *
> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/m_Ljx53NmaU>
>
>
> The article claims a hacker said he's been using this bug for 3 years,
> which, if true, indicates, yet again, Apple doesn't seem to sufficiently
> test iOS for years on end...

You might have more credibility if you weren't a proven liar, Liar.

'I don't use a newsreader, as my newsreader is "vim" & "telnet",'

You agree that you wrote that, don't you?

Before you answer (yes or no only, please), I'd like you to check this link:

<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/comp.mobile.android/lry_-LUtso0/l9fpf6omAAAJ>

All done? Good.

Now, where do you suppose the following text came from:

'User agent NewsTap/5.4.1 (iPhone/iPod Touch)'

Well? Give up?

The post to which I'm replying...

...as well as the post where you wrote:

'I don't use a newsreader, as my newsreader is "vim" & "telnet",'

So you're a liar, aren't you?

:-)

[Arlen Holder]

On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 09:04:05 +0530, Arlen Holder wrote:

> FACT:
> Yet more incontrovertible proof of insufficient iOS testing for a decade!

> o MARKETING claims of security vs the Apple reality are completely different.
>
> Dateline today...(everything below is verbatim fact as reported):
>
> o Apples default Mail app for the iPhone has a severe security flaw
> <https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/22/21231454/apple-iphone-zero-day-exploit-security-flaw-mail-app-ios-zec-ops>
> "The exploit has existed for almost 10 years"

> "Security researchers say the iPhone has a severe flaw in the native
> iOS Mail app that makes it vulnerable to hackers"
> "all it requires to remotely execute code on a victim's iOS device is
> for the Mail app to receive the email and for the victim to open
> the message"
>

> o A critical iPhone and iPad bug that lurked for 8 years may be under active attack
> <https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2020/04/a-critical-iphone-and-ipad-bug-that-lurked-for-8-years-is-under-active-attack/>
> "Malicious emails require little or no interaction;
> exploits active since at least 2018"
> "the full scope of abuse of this vulnerability is enormous"
> "To prevent attacks until Apple releases a general-availability patch,
> users can either install the beta 13.4.5 or use an alternate email app
> such as Gmail or Outlook"
>
> o You've Got (0-click) Mail!
> <https://blog.zecops.com/vulnerabilities/unassisted-ios-attacks-via-mobilemail-maild-in-the-wild/>
> "The vulnerabilities exist at least since iOS 6
> (issue date: September 2012) when iPhone 5 was released
> The earliest triggers we have observed in the wild were
> on iOS 11.2.2 in January 2018"
>
> o Newly disclosed iPhone vulnerability means emails are an even bigger risk
> <https://mashable.com/article/apple-ios-iphone-email-vulnerability/>
> "And here's the real kick to the guts: In some cases, you don't even
> have to be tricked into opening the email. The damage is done simply
> by your phone downloading the malicious email in the background."
>
> iPhone's Mail app has two severe "zero-click" vulnerabilities that have existed for 8 years
> <https://www.techspot.com/news/84947-iphone-mail-app-has-two-severe-zero-click.html>
> "A fix is coming in iOS 13.4.5"
> "Apple's iOS 13 has received several bug fixing updates in its six month
> lifespan so far, among the most notable: a patch that addressed killing
> of background apps, another that drained your battery for no apparent
> reason, one that prevented from using the camera, or track your precise
> location even if you had expressly disabled that in settings. These new
> vulnerabilities however sound considerably more serious."
>
> o iPhone Mail app zero-day exploits found in the wild
> <https://9to5mac.com/2020/04/22/report-iphone-mail-app-zero-day-exploits-found-in-the-wild-apple-has-fix-coming-in-next-public-ios-release/>
> "The zero-click exploit works through the default iOS Mail app
> and is potentially dangerous as a user doesn't need to tap
> or click anything to have their device compromised. The vulnerability
> allows remote code execution capabilities and enables an attacker to
> remotely infect a device by sending emails that consume significant
> amount of memory. ZecOps says that it has discovered evidence of the
> attacks being used in the wild and believes them to be widely exploited"

Apologists _hate_ what Apple is, so they brazenly deny what Apple does.
o Apple _ignored_ this security hole so long the research had to go public.

o Let's talk about a vulnerability that's completely exposing your macOS devices
<https://ironpeak.be/blog/crouching-t2-hidden-danger/>

"In case you are using a recent macOS device, you are probably using the
embedded T2 security chip which runs bridgeOS and is actually based on
watchOS. This is a custom ARM processor designed by Apple based on the A10
CPU found in the iPhone 7. The T2 chip contains a Secure Enclave Processor
(SEP), much like the A-series processor in your iPhone will contain a SEP."
o "*The root of trust on macOS is inherently broken*"
o "They can bruteforce your FileVault2 volume password"
o "They can alter your macOS installation"
o "They can load arbitrary kernel extensions"

See also:
o Yet another of the never-ending plethora of unpatchable security flaws
in Apple's chips widely reported in the news today
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/Hgk2W8buyac>
--
The plethora of unpatchable flaws existing in Apple chips is astounding.