The last thing China wants during a trade war is to have the 3 million people in Apple's supply chain unemployed and angry.

This particular leverage is also why iMessage isn't blocked in China.

iMessage isn't blocked in China because it doesn't need to be. China passed a law forcing Apple to put all Chinese users' iCloud data in a Chinese datacenter. Since Apple allows for account recovery, they store account keys in that datacenter. Anyone with privileged access to certain production resources in iCloud China should be able to access basically all Chinese users' data.

The one exception is apparently Apple's keychain as per https://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2018/01/16/icloud-i.... But, if the hardware used to enforce the security is different in China, even that could be cracked.

IIUC if you disable iCloud backup of iMessages, you're safe here. This is because iMessage is E2EE enforced by the Secure Enclave when iCloud backup of iMessages is disabled.

More likely because Apple gave China the master encryption keys: https://techcrunch.com/2018/02/25/apple-moves-icloud-encrypt...

iMessage is end-to-end encrypted.

If you really believe that China doesn't have a deal with Apple that nerfs this in China, I have a bridge to sell you.

China, a country which mandates spyware be installed on phones. Which uses deep packet inspection to block access to foreign websites, that bans VPNs in app stores. China, a country which forces the population of Xinjiang to install Jingwang (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jingwang_Weishi), a spyware app so they can grab your on-device files. Which has deployed facial recognition cameras in many cities. Which blocked access to Wikipedi because it switched to HTTPS.

That China, you think, is going to allow all of that to be circumvented just by buying an iPhone? Right. Chinese Government: "You're not allowed to use VPNs. But if you're in Xinjiang, and you need privacy, we recommend buying an iPhone, since it doesn't work with Jingwang, nor deep packet inspection. Just tell the police you have an iPhone, and we'll wave the usual regulations we impose on Android devices."

Last time I was in Xinjiang, people there had iPhones. No one believes iMessage would be snoop proof.

It doesn't matter what you believe because Apple said that was the case in court filings during the FBI legal fight. Tim Cook reaffirmed that in an interview with Vice last fall.

What Apple says about what they do in the US, and what they do in China, are two different things. And what Tim Cook reaffirmed is irrelevant, what matters is how the iMessage protocol works.

As far as I can tell, the way iMessage works according to Apple's documentation, is that endpoints generate 1280-bit RSA encryption keys, hold the private keys on the device, but publish the public keys to a centralized IDS Directory Server. Note that their published security documents curiously don't say anything about man-in-the-middle mitigation, and indeed, MITM attacks against iMessage on IOS9 were publicly documented.

Now, what do you know about where the IDS servers are located in China, and who controls them? Because if Apple doesn't control them, and control them in a way that makes them impossible to spoof, then it is easy for the Chinese government to attack iMessage.

Thus, Tim Cook could say "We haven't put any backdoors into iMessage for the Chinese government and it is end to end encrypted" and it would be a true statement, but also Apple engineers could know full well the IDS in China could be subject to a MITM.

A plausible way this could happen, after Apple moved the iCloud keys to China, is that the Chinese government could request to intercept communications from a particular user, and the public keys of every recipient that user communicates with could be replaced with a MITM key so they can rely the messages and see the unencrypted content.

We don't know, but what we do know is that iMessage has been attacked with MITM before, and we know the PRC isn't going to let unbreakable encryption be sold to Uighurs in Xinjiang. It defies logic.

So they said and you believed.

iMessage is encrypted in transit and at rest. However, that doesn't matter if your attacker (the Chinese government) has the encryption keys

The article refers to icloud encryption keys, not imessage keys.

If imessages are backed up to icloud, then the govt will have keys to see them. But if a user doesn't back up, I was under the impression not even apple could decrypt iMessages.

Correct, for data that isn't backed up, you would need to have root access to the user's device.

i do believe rubber-hose decryption works wonders in china.

Not even root access would suffice. You'd need the user passcode.

iMessage (public) keys are "backed up" to IDS directory services. This is how Apple devices do key-exchange with one another. If there is no man-in-the-middle mitigation for IDS, then all the Chinese government needs to do is return spoofed keys for anyone you're communicating with. Remember, when you send messages to other people, you encrypt with THEIR key, not yours (on device). Your key is used for signatures and decrypting messages sent to you by them. THEIR Key comes from the cloud, and thus subject to attack if key exchange wasn't secure.

Doesn't matter if you backup messages to icloud.

That's no different anywhere else in the world.

How do you think iMessages are "restored" when you lose your iPhone and get a new one?

> The last thing China wants during a trade war is to have the 3 million people in Apple's supply chain unemployed and angry.

As an autocracy, China could easily compensate workers for any loss of work. But another obvious answer is that if Apple were banned in China, Huawei and Xiaomi would pick up the slack.

If China really wanted to, they could shut down all iPhone production for the immediate future.

If China shut down apple then you would see company/capital flight from China like you've never before seen in history. The communist party is powerful but I doubt if they could handle a 20% spike in unemployment of some of the best jobs in the country.

Apple isn't the only company in China, plus they could buy-back or eminent domain closed factories and assign them to SOEs.

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Foxconn#/Major_customers

Once the population boycott a brand or a country the Chinese propaganda and people really do boycott them. Read the news about South Korea and Japan trade wars. The Chinese even tried to burn down a Toyota factory.

Apple's been losing marketshare (and unit sales) while Chinese domestic companies' market share has been growing, so that balances things out. The world's #1 smartphone maker Samsung moved much (50%>) of their smartphone assembly operation out of China and hardly anyone noticed it.

They could still hazard it.

The only thing the Chinese government has to do is explain that American imperialist white piggus are trying to destroy the Chinese people and they wouldn't even be lying for once.

Nationalism is a play card in every country.

> However, if I were Apple, I'd be really worried about retaliation.

I think this view is too narrow. For the Chinese government, there is something more important than revenge. Why kick that cash machine out of your country if it still paying your people paid and make then happy?

I guess the retaliation will come in a different form, even something out of the trade section maybe, depends on what's on Xi's table.

How much more expensive would an iPhone be that’s assembled in the US?

Cost is not the reason all consumer electronics are made in China. Actually, manufacturing there is now more expensive than Estern Europe.

They build them there because all the supply chain is already there. In Shenzhen, the capacitors, resistors, PCBs and most chips are sourced in bulk from around the block. That's something no other country in the West or even East has and it's such a complex interconnected ecosystem that you can't replicate it anywhere else right now.

Most of the CNC, tooling and moulding craftsmen are there as well, the west has far too few left to be able to take over such volumes. Training so many can take years and that's assuming you even find enough people willing to be trained.

I've been watching a lot of videos on Shenzhen and it's just mental. There's basically same day delivery by bicycle or truck of anything your supply line might be running low on.

It's like their transport latency is so low and reliable that they don't need as much buffering. It's amazing to see what small and large quantity production lines can look like.

> It's like their transport latency is so low

Reading this, I begin to scratch head hearing people complaining about factories being squeezed out towards boundaries of Shenzhen municipality.

I remember people thinking of that as some end of the world event.

Can you please share those links here

Strange Parts YouTube channel offers some insights into Chinese electronics industry: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCO8DQrSp5yEP937qNqTooOw

The bigger issue is that the nature of smart phone releases is that each time you want to bring out a new model, you need to employ a few tens of thousands of people for a relatively short time to assemble them. This isn't possible in most countries due to labour laws and/or shortage of workers.

tesla is starting to automate car manufacturing and seems to be making progress. can you comment on the feasibility on automating smartphone manufacturing? do elements of smartphone manufacturing render automation intractable, or harder than car manufacturing?

As I understand it, the majority of individual smartphone components would be manufactured using automation, and the primary step that takes place in Shenzhen is someone physically putting all the pieces together. I couldn't make an informed comment on the feasibility or cost effectiveness of trying to automate this process as well (I'd guess it's fairly low due to the relative uniqueness of each phone model) but maybe someone else can.

And Tesla is well behind the major car manufacturers in using automation.

the car/tesla analogy was a mistake as it's secondary and evidently not true, but too late to edit the comment. thanks for sharing about smartphone manufacturing. it seems like foxconn is already moving toward this, though naturally slower than projected: https://qz.com/1312079/iphone-maker-foxconn-is-churning-out-...

can you recommend any sources for learning more about the state of automated CE/smartphone manufacturing, or this based on personal experience?

“Yes, excessive automation at Tesla was a mistake,” Musk said via Twitter a few months ago. “To be precise, my mistake. Humans are underrated.”

Wow. Look at Tesla go!

Why hasn't any other auto manufacturer thought of this?!

The other auto makers are too busy rolling around in their billions in profit.

Tesla doesn't have this problem you see.

Haha. Yes. That they really don't. Good point

This is ridiculous. You are making it sound like those suppliers are immovable and somehow only available in China. But let's face it, Apple is in China because of almost unlimited cheap, unskilled rural labor force that can't be found elsewhere. Samsung was also in same spot years ago, but found a much better deal in Vietnam years back and in fact moved much of their smartphone operation there (along with some 200+ subcontractors and suppliers). Unlike Samsung's AMOLED displays, Corning's Gorilla glasses, or SONY's cameras, there is nothing in China that can't be produced elsewhere.

Vietnam also has hundreds of thousands of CNC, toolings and craftmen to produce in Samsung's volume. This supply chain narrative is something Apple marketing folks invented to justify their outsourcing. Trump's trade war with China, as many contract manufacturer move out of China, will prove none of that supply chain myth is true within a year or two.

Everything you've mentioned is basically synonymous with "cost."

An iPhone built in the US from domestic components would probably cost more than most peoples' cars.

While you're right that the logistical issues can all be reduced to cost, it removes a lot of nuance to act as if logistical superiority is the same as the vernacular low-cost.

A lot more, if it could be made at all:

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/22/business/apple-america-an...

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/28/technology/iphones-apple-...

In what world is Huawei a leading premium device manufacturer? Do you have a source?

Do you consider Samsung a premium Android manufacturer? I assume you're not defining "premium" == "Apple". If you admit that there are premium Android phones, and that Samsung is one of the manufacturers, well, Huawei is on track to surpass Samsung in units sold, AND it has the best reviewed camera. It blows away the iPhone X series, especially at low light, but also produces incredible night/low light protography beating even the Google Pixel Night Sight mode.

in China, they are now the most expensive phones, people are willing to pay more $$$ to get the top of the line Huawei than an iPhone which used to be the previous "look am me, I'm rich and trendy" device to own there. It's one reason why iPhone sales in China have declined.

There's no world in which you can't claim they are not a world leading phone manufacturer and that their devices aren't premium. Sure, the heavy modded Android sucks and is probably spyware and you can't get vanilla android on it, but hardware wise, it is premium. The P30 Pro runs for almost $1000.

People who live in the US kind of live in a reality distortion field around Apple, and are somewhat blind to what is happening in Europe and Asia. And this complacence is a pretty bad way to evaluate your competitors.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Huawei-threatening-Samsung-for...

https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/12/18221598/huawei-apple-chi...

https://www.theverge.com/2019/4/10/18285123/huawei-p30-pro-r...

Would Xiaomi be a leading premium manufacture if they had a devices running for $1000, when their Smartphone ASP is below $200?

>People who live in the US kind of live in a reality distortion field around Apple, and are somewhat blind to what is happening in Europe and Asia. And this complacence is a pretty bad way to evaluate your competitors.

It isn't RDF, it is "leading premium manufacture" does mean what you think it means. It would be more accurate if it was "leading premium Android manufacturers".

I agree they are a world leading manufacturer (#2 behind Samsung), and I agree that some of their devices are premium. I'm just saying they are not a leading premium manufacturer. Those are 2 different things. Apple and Samsung are by far ahead in volume sold for premium devices globally.

This doesn't show they are a leading premium smartphone manufacturer. This says they are a 2nd largest smartphone manufacturer.

Leading premium manufacturer means largest volume of premium smartphones sold. Huawei doesn't sell a lot of P30 (although I agree it's a premium device).

This. And I am surprised at the amount of downvote and I quote "an assertion that is a fairly well-known fact."

Where’s your citation on P30 sales figures? If apple doesn’t sell as many iPhone X’s as P30s in China does that make Apple not a premium manufacturer if most of their sales are lower end?

https://www.huaweicentral.com/huawei-p30-series-single-day-s...

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/01/huawei-ahead-of-apple-in-q1-...

In 2018, they shipped 16 million P20s in 9 months. And they shipped 100,000 in a single day which could translate to 3 million units a month or 27 million in 9 months, but even if they ship 20 million in 9 months which is 25% more than the P20 you can’t wave you hands and act like no one is buying these phones.

Because Apple report their Smartphone ASP, ( at least in iPhone X era ) And you will need to look up even the worst of iPhone X estimate shipment figures.

No one, me or the previous one who replied said anything about P20 not selling. Nor the P30. It is simply not leading premium Smartphone, where Smartphone here is inclusive of iOS. Not by commonly used matrix, where the word leading would directly referred to market ASP and not leading as in technically. And I said this again, it would be correct if the sentence was leading premium Android Smartphone. Or Leading Smartphone ( Excluding Android ) or Leading Android would also be correct.

And I am out.

In a world outside the US, where the Huawei P30 Pro has the best camera combo, one of the fastest processors and a premium. build (and price).

He is right.

Source? And how do you define premium? The sentence implies leading as in market shares, and not technological.

Huawei p30 leads Apple on camera quality by far. It has premium build quality and battery life.

In market share they lead Apple in China, and they ship more units.

Trying to act like they’re a low end bit player is ludicrous. They’re the Samsung of China now, and on track to overtake Samsung globally.

In this one.

Asking for a source for an assertion that is a fairly well-known fact is simply lazy.

Fact?

Huawei is #2 or #1 by unit shipment. That doesn't immediately make them a "leading" Premium Smartphone maker. I could sell 200M of $200 Phones and 10M of $700 Phones. Would that make them leading? Would that make them premium?