chiisana@lemmy.chiisana.net
on 17 Jun 2024 23:26
nextcollapse
Very much as expected… fragmented, incomplete, and highly dependent on carrier. Google’s non standard E2EE extension will likely only work if messages are routed through their servers, which based on the observations here, even from the Android side it doesn’t seems to be routed through Google. Larger file means better quality pictures via green bubbles, anyone who’s sent/received a garbage and cares enough knows to send via third party messaging apps anyway, so nothing life changing here.
Let’s see if Apple applies pressure and push everyone to use Google’s servers for E2EE as they move towards iOS 18, but other than that… I’m still inclined to think the down play during keynote is apt.
akilou@sh.itjust.works
on 17 Jun 2024 23:28
collapse
anyone who’s sent/received a garbage and cares enough knows to send via third party messaging apps anyway
Tell that to my in-laws
chiisana@lemmy.chiisana.net
on 17 Jun 2024 23:37
collapse
Sorry to be the one to break it to you… if that’s the feeling you’re getting, then they most likely don’t care enough…
akilou@sh.itjust.works
on 18 Jun 2024 00:26
collapse
They just don’t understand technology enough to appreciate the difference. You should see them drive with a navigation app
chiisana@lemmy.chiisana.net
on 18 Jun 2024 00:32
collapse
Yeah I know what you mean. Grandma’s the same… she doesn’t care if it doesn’t look good when zoomed in, she just wants to see the picture.
helenslunch@feddit.nl
on 17 Jun 2024 23:57
nextcollapse
there’s no end-to-end encryption (E2EE) support between the two platforms
Called it. Malicious compliance, as expected.
They’re adhering to the bare minimum specifications of RCS.
NobodyElse@sh.itjust.works
on 18 Jun 2024 00:37
collapse
E2EE is not part of the standard and only exists as a proprietary Google extension, using Google’s servers. Implying that implementing RCS would get everyone cross-platform E2EE is misinformation.
helenslunch@feddit.nl
on 18 Jun 2024 00:45
collapse
E2EE is not part of the standard and only exists as a proprietary Google extension
Yes, that is the point I was making, thank you for elaborating.
Implying that implementing RCS would get everyone cross-platform E2EE is misinformation.
And why should apple (or anyone for that matter) be forced to use googles proprietary code for an “open standard”?
Also,
There is, naturally, a wrinkle here. The RCS standard still doesn’t support end-to-end encryption. Apple, which has offered encrypted messaging for over a decade, is kind of a stickler about security. Apple says it won’t be supporting any proprietary extensions that seek to add encryption on top of RCS and hopes, instead, to work with the GSM Association to add encryption to the standard.
Well then why did you describe them not doing that as malicious compliance?
helenslunch@feddit.nl
on 18 Jun 2024 02:00
collapse
Because there are 5000 different open protocols they could have chosen from.
SMillerNL@lemmy.world
on 18 Jun 2024 06:21
collapse
To support E2EE in RCS?
helenslunch@feddit.nl
on 18 Jun 2024 14:46
collapse
To support E2EE
Correct
chiisana@lemmy.chiisana.net
on 18 Jun 2024 23:24
collapse
Apple offers first party E2EE messaging for their clients, via iMessage.
As part of China’s certification requirements, Apple has been tasked to support RCS, which, per the spec, does not have E2EE feature.
I’ll say this again: RCS does not support E2EE.
If that’s not registering: RCS does not support E2EE.
Come to the think of it, it would actually be surprising if China is mandating an E2EE capable implementation, but I digress.
In order to comply with this requirement, Apple implemented RCS per the specs of RCS. Again, RCS does not support E2EE. There is no specification of RCS that supports E2EE at this time.
Google runs a proprietary system that they’ve built based off of RCS, but is not RCS. This proprietary protocol, which is not RCS, has custom extensions of their own to offer E2EE. Apple is under zero obligation to implement against this, because this is not RCS. In fact, as demonstrated, even other Android systems don’t do this. They use the carrier RCS, which while fragmented and incomplete, consistently does not have E2EE, because, again, RCS does not support E2EE.
There are plenty of cross platform E2EE solutions available: Matrix, Signal, and WhatsApp, are a few major players that popped to mind. I’m sure there are plenty of others that I didn’t call out. They are cross platform which means they already exist on both iOS and Android platforms.
Neither Apple nor Google have any reason to implement those protocols, as, again, they already exist on platform.
How is Apple not implementing Google’s proprietary extension malicious compliance as you called it?
BorgDrone@lemmy.one
on 19 Jun 2024 01:05
nextcollapse
To add to this: Apple is actively working with Google and the GSMA to add E2EE to the RCS standard. Apple can no do this on their own, as RCS is a standard set by the GSMA. They need to go through the entire slow and bureaucratic process to add a feature to RCS, so while this will appear eventually I wouldn’t hold my breath.
This also shows exactly why something like RCS cannot ever offer anything other than the bare basic messaging functionality. You cannot innovate on RCS because every change needs to go through a committee who’s all want to have a say in it and before you know it you’re spending years in committee meetings to add a single feature.
Meanwhile, Apple decides they want to add a feature to iMessage, they roll it out in the next iOS update and it’s available to billions of users pretty much overnight.
helenslunch@feddit.nl
on 19 Jun 2024 02:52
collapse
I’ll say this again: RCS does not support E2EE.
You didn’t even need to say it once because I said it in the parent comment…
A lot of other people were under the impression that it was. I am not one of them. Please read better.
Neither Apple nor Google have any reason to implement those protocols, as, again, they already exist on platform.
Yes they do. The reason is the same one that forced Apple to implement RCS and forced WhatsApp to interoperate as well.
How is Apple not implementing Google’s proprietary extension malicious compliance as you called it?
I already answered this. Please read better.
chiisana@lemmy.chiisana.net
on 19 Jun 2024 12:23
collapse
I already answered this. Please read better.
Judging by the community response here… no, you have not, please write better.
I won’t bother replying anymore.
helenslunch@feddit.nl
on 19 Jun 2024 13:08
collapse
The community response does not determine whether or not I have provided an answer. The fact that I already answered it proves that I did. Literally just scroll up. It’s not that hard.
JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
on 18 Jun 2024 07:00
nextcollapse
Why would they go with RCS though when Google’s proprietary messenger is the only Android client for that standard? Why not something open, like Matrix?
chiisana@lemmy.chiisana.net
on 18 Jun 2024 07:37
nextcollapse
Apple did not do this because they suddenly have a change of heart about the green bubbles. Apple did not do this to spite regulatory bodies and ‘malice compliance’ with some interoperability mandate.
This is not a move to make messaging more secure with the green bubbles. This is not a move to make messaging better with the green bubbles. This is a move so they can continue to sell phones in China.
LodeMike@lemmy.today
on 19 Jun 2024 00:21
collapse
Because they can’t control Matrix
PsyDoctah9Jah@lemmy.world
on 18 Jun 2024 14:38
nextcollapse
Terrible. The next evolution to SMS MMS shouldn’t be proprietary and fragmented.Google Messages is meh and is the only RCS Unless you have a carrier device and use Samsung Messages which is soon going away. Apple and iMessage being Apple only ruined universal messaging and all users on Apple or Android should have not let this happen.
chiisana@lemmy.chiisana.net
on 18 Jun 2024 18:42
nextcollapse
Honestly I think this is a standards issue not an Apple or Google issue.
Apple needs to serve their clients and iMessages is great for that. Google needs to serve their clients and they’re putting forward their RCS extension, which could be good if they can gain traction, but their reputation precedes them, so thats going as well as anyone would expect. Neither parties really have obligations beyond, as the standard beyond their own offering is SMS MMS which they both support.
GSM is responsible for the next evolution of the carrier level messaging, which is RCS (without the E2EE extension Google is putting forth), and it’s their job to make that the standard implemented by all carriers. It’d be great if they add E2EE to the standard, but the fragmentation ant carrier level isn’t going to magically resolve if they cannot get carriers to implement it properly.
jol@discuss.tchncs.de
on 18 Jun 2024 23:36
collapse
Unfortunately the world has moved on. As far as I cam tell, SMS is used by people in the US and little else. For the rest of the world, SMS is old news.
I have some hopes for the EU forcing all messemging apps to interoperable, but I won’t hold my breath for real user friendly change.
namingthingsiseasy@programming.dev
on 19 Jun 2024 00:25
collapse
Such a sad world we live in. When the internet was hitting the mainstream, virtually everything was standardized. There were RFCs for probably every standard the internet operated on. Email, HTTP, DNS, TCP/UDP/IP, etc.
Today, we live in a world where we can’t even decide on a fucking chat protocol without making it a proprietary piece of garbage. The internet has been consolidated into giant companies that see interoperability as a weakness that enable their competitors and prevent them from oppressing and exploiting their users.
A small group of gatekeepers that kill anything nice for their own short-term gains: it is sad but true that it feels like any technology that’s commercially successful will end this way.
threaded - newest
Very much as expected… fragmented, incomplete, and highly dependent on carrier. Google’s non standard E2EE extension will likely only work if messages are routed through their servers, which based on the observations here, even from the Android side it doesn’t seems to be routed through Google. Larger file means better quality pictures via green bubbles, anyone who’s sent/received a garbage and cares enough knows to send via third party messaging apps anyway, so nothing life changing here.
Let’s see if Apple applies pressure and push everyone to use Google’s servers for E2EE as they move towards iOS 18, but other than that… I’m still inclined to think the down play during keynote is apt.
Tell that to my in-laws
Sorry to be the one to break it to you… if that’s the feeling you’re getting, then they most likely don’t care enough…
They just don’t understand technology enough to appreciate the difference. You should see them drive with a navigation app
Yeah I know what you mean. Grandma’s the same… she doesn’t care if it doesn’t look good when zoomed in, she just wants to see the picture.
Called it. Malicious compliance, as expected.
They’re adhering to the bare minimum specifications of RCS.
E2EE is not part of the standard and only exists as a proprietary Google extension, using Google’s servers. Implying that implementing RCS would get everyone cross-platform E2EE is misinformation.
Yes, that is the point I was making, thank you for elaborating.
Correct again, thanks.
And why should apple (or anyone for that matter) be forced to use googles proprietary code for an “open standard”?
Also,
techradar.com/…/breaking-apple-will-support-rcs-i…
They shouldn’t.
Well then why did you describe them not doing that as malicious compliance?
Because there are 5000 different open protocols they could have chosen from.
To support E2EE in RCS?
Correct
Apple offers first party E2EE messaging for their clients, via iMessage.
As part of China’s certification requirements, Apple has been tasked to support RCS, which, per the spec, does not have E2EE feature.
I’ll say this again: RCS does not support E2EE.
If that’s not registering: RCS does not support E2EE.
Come to the think of it, it would actually be surprising if China is mandating an E2EE capable implementation, but I digress.
In order to comply with this requirement, Apple implemented RCS per the specs of RCS. Again, RCS does not support E2EE. There is no specification of RCS that supports E2EE at this time.
Google runs a proprietary system that they’ve built based off of RCS, but is not RCS. This proprietary protocol, which is not RCS, has custom extensions of their own to offer E2EE. Apple is under zero obligation to implement against this, because this is not RCS. In fact, as demonstrated, even other Android systems don’t do this. They use the carrier RCS, which while fragmented and incomplete, consistently does not have E2EE, because, again, RCS does not support E2EE.
There are plenty of cross platform E2EE solutions available: Matrix, Signal, and WhatsApp, are a few major players that popped to mind. I’m sure there are plenty of others that I didn’t call out. They are cross platform which means they already exist on both iOS and Android platforms.
Neither Apple nor Google have any reason to implement those protocols, as, again, they already exist on platform.
How is Apple not implementing Google’s proprietary extension malicious compliance as you called it?
To add to this: Apple is actively working with Google and the GSMA to add E2EE to the RCS standard. Apple can no do this on their own, as RCS is a standard set by the GSMA. They need to go through the entire slow and bureaucratic process to add a feature to RCS, so while this will appear eventually I wouldn’t hold my breath.
This also shows exactly why something like RCS cannot ever offer anything other than the bare basic messaging functionality. You cannot innovate on RCS because every change needs to go through a committee who’s all want to have a say in it and before you know it you’re spending years in committee meetings to add a single feature.
Meanwhile, Apple decides they want to add a feature to iMessage, they roll it out in the next iOS update and it’s available to billions of users pretty much overnight.
You didn’t even need to say it once because I said it in the parent comment…
A lot of other people were under the impression that it was. I am not one of them. Please read better.
Yes they do. The reason is the same one that forced Apple to implement RCS and forced WhatsApp to interoperate as well.
I already answered this. Please read better.
Judging by the community response here… no, you have not, please write better.
I won’t bother replying anymore.
The community response does not determine whether or not I have provided an answer. The fact that I already answered it proves that I did. Literally just scroll up. It’s not that hard.
Why would they go with RCS though when Google’s proprietary messenger is the only Android client for that standard? Why not something open, like Matrix?
Apple is implementing it because China requires all 5G phones to support RCS to get certified.
Apple did not do this because they suddenly have a change of heart about the green bubbles. Apple did not do this to spite regulatory bodies and ‘malice compliance’ with some interoperability mandate.
This is not a move to make messaging more secure with the green bubbles. This is not a move to make messaging better with the green bubbles. This is a move so they can continue to sell phones in China.
Because they can’t control Matrix
Terrible. The next evolution to SMS MMS shouldn’t be proprietary and fragmented.Google Messages is meh and is the only RCS Unless you have a carrier device and use Samsung Messages which is soon going away. Apple and iMessage being Apple only ruined universal messaging and all users on Apple or Android should have not let this happen.
Honestly I think this is a standards issue not an Apple or Google issue.
Apple needs to serve their clients and iMessages is great for that. Google needs to serve their clients and they’re putting forward their RCS extension, which could be good if they can gain traction, but their reputation precedes them, so thats going as well as anyone would expect. Neither parties really have obligations beyond, as the standard beyond their own offering is SMS MMS which they both support.
GSM is responsible for the next evolution of the carrier level messaging, which is RCS (without the E2EE extension Google is putting forth), and it’s their job to make that the standard implemented by all carriers. It’d be great if they add E2EE to the standard, but the fragmentation ant carrier level isn’t going to magically resolve if they cannot get carriers to implement it properly.
Unfortunately the world has moved on. As far as I cam tell, SMS is used by people in the US and little else. For the rest of the world, SMS is old news.
I have some hopes for the EU forcing all messemging apps to interoperable, but I won’t hold my breath for real user friendly change.
Such a sad world we live in. When the internet was hitting the mainstream, virtually everything was standardized. There were RFCs for probably every standard the internet operated on. Email, HTTP, DNS, TCP/UDP/IP, etc.
Today, we live in a world where we can’t even decide on a fucking chat protocol without making it a proprietary piece of garbage. The internet has been consolidated into giant companies that see interoperability as a weakness that enable their competitors and prevent them from oppressing and exploiting their users.
A small group of gatekeepers that kill anything nice for their own short-term gains: it is sad but true that it feels like any technology that’s commercially successful will end this way.