14-year-old discovered FaceTime eavesdropping bug. Apple ignored mother's calls

[gary]

In an article today (https://www.apnews.com/6de22b18cf38450db65ef582b15f0564) by Matt O'Brien at Associated Press, it is being
reported how the Apple FaceTime eavesdropping bug was discovered by
a 14-year-old and that despite his mother contacting Apple nearly every
day by email, telephone and fax, it took the company nine days to respond.

The New York Attorney General and Governor of New York are now investigating to
determine whether Apple may be culpable.






Article here :-
https://www.apnews.com/6de22b18cf38450db65ef582b15f0564

[multiweb]

:lol: They keep mentioning the kid should "get a reward". That's what it's all about. :)

[gary]

What I think Tim Cook should be doing is sacking the vice president
of customer service and appointing the mother as the replacement.

Her dogmatism at trying to do the right thing demonstrates she cares
more than they do.

I would then allow her to sack anyone down the chain beneath her and
have them replaced as she sees fit. :thumbsup:

[multiweb]

I don't know, this lack of response from Apple doesn't really surprise me. Maybe because I'm used to deal with this kind of attitude day in day out at work, after a while it becomes normal and you have to work with it or around it. The whole industry nowadays is pointing fingers and no accountability. I don't think anyone at Apple is really worried. Won't even register as a blip in their bottom line.

[gary]

Hi Marc,

I think you could be right there! :)

What's ironic is do you remember the Apple-FBI dispute?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FBI%E2%80%93Apple_encryption_disput e

Tim Cook at the time issued a statement saying, "The United States
government has demanded that Apple take an unprecedented step
which threatens the security of our customers."

Even the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights at the time
warned the FBI of the potential for "extremely damaging implications on
human rights" if the FBI were allowed to compel a manufacturer, under
the direction of a court order, to decrypt the contents of a smart phone.

But perhaps Tim Cook's real concern was not with human rights but
that buyers of smatphones might switch to brands manufactured
by companies outside of the United States where the FBI's jurisdiction
may not exist? In other words, was the real concern the bottom line
rather than customer security?

Or are they genuinely concerned about customer security but as an
organisation that has become impossibly large, lack an effective and
timely security reporting mechanism for the average joe?

At a technical level it also says something about the thin veneer of
the software user interface on a smartphone that can create the illusion
to the user that such-and-such a piece of functionality is switched "off"
when in fact if one purposely crafted the software to improperly do so,
that feature remains "on".

Probably standard trade-craft at the NSA, Mossad, SVR, GCHQ, ASD and
the like.

[multiweb]

The sad reality is that any electronic storage that is accessible online is up for grabs. The flaw doesn't lie in technology but in people and practices. As long as one understands this simple fact then there won't be any surprises. Every extra layer, may it be legal, privacy or ease of access is imho just wind because in the end there is always someone who knows how to bypass all that and just does it. The temptation and the financial rewards outweigh any shred of decency or business ethic. I might sound cynical but I keep seeing the same things times and times again, different people, same sh!t with a new coat of paint. It's like groundhog day.