News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:About the security content of iOS 14.7.1 and iPadOS 14.7.1 by williamsmj on Monday July 26, 2021 @08:21PM (#27967177)
Congratulations on your "common sense", but several highly publicized and actively exploited recent exploits against iOS required no user interaction:

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2020/12/iphone-zero-click-wi...

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2020/12/zero-...

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/07/clickless-exploits-f...

etc., etc.

Re:About the security content of iOS 14.7.1 and iPadOS 14.7.1 by tasogare on Monday July 26, 2021 @09:31PM (#27967604)
There isn't any commercial or open-source mobile without security flaws. Given the importance of iOS it's no wonder it's under scrutiny by attackers, just like Windows was (is) while Apple was memeing a virus free Mac OS. That wasn't the case, it's just MacOS was a mostly irrelevant target.
Re:About the security content of iOS 14.7.1 and iPadOS 14.7.1 by simondotau on Tuesday July 27, 2021 @01:21AM (#27968923)
I'm not so sure it's accurate to describe macOS as being an irrelevant target. MacBooks in particular have had a not-insignificant market share among many valuable targets for hackers (software developers, the affluent etc) for at least ten if not fifteen years now.
Re:About the security content of iOS 14.7.1 and iPadOS 14.7.1 by danieldk on Tuesday July 27, 2021 @03:03AM (#27969468)
Also, it I think meming is a bit of a stretch. Of all the desktop operating systems (macOS, Linux, Windows), macOS has had the strongest security push. E.g. integration of the secure enclave throughout the system for protecting secrets, read-only system volume, mandatory sandboxing for App Store apps, and requiring applications to request use of screen capture/camera/mic/address book, etc.

Sure, holes are found. Strong security is a long process of adding more and more boundaries (while giving the ecosystem some time to adapt to those boundaries) and fixing more and more logic/memory errors.

Regardless, macOS is probably the most secure desktop operating system out-of-the-box.

Re:About the security content of iOS 14.7.1 and iPadOS 14.7.1 by vlan0 on Tuesday July 27, 2021 @10:41AM (#27973026)
>Also, it I think meming is a bit of a stretch.

It kinda was, imo. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eF7habaTvAY

Re:About the security content of iOS 14.7.1 and iPadOS 14.7.1 by tclancy on Monday July 26, 2021 @09:10PM (#27967492)
Are there none for Android?
Re:About the security content of iOS 14.7.1 and iPadOS 14.7.1 by wetpaws on Monday July 26, 2021 @10:33PM (#27967987)
Exploits for Android do not negate exploits for iOS
Re:About the security content of iOS 14.7.1 and iPadOS 14.7.1 by sudosysgen on Monday July 26, 2021 @11:52PM (#27968424)
That's whataboutism. Unless there are many more exploits for Android, more than the increase in marketshare warrants, there is no reason to think a closed ecosystem is more secure than an open one.
Re:About the security content of iOS 14.7.1 and iPadOS 14.7.1 by geocar on Tuesday July 27, 2021 @12:09AM (#27968509)
It is hard to speak about the exploits we don’t know about, but for the ones we do: There are vastly more exploits on Android, evidenced by for no other reason than because handset manufacturers refuse to upgrade.
Re:About the security content of iOS 14.7.1 and iPadOS 14.7.1 by vmception on Tuesday July 27, 2021 @01:54AM (#27969079)
Asking questions about the only competitor is valid

If thats a whataboutism then whataboutisms were always valid and accurate forms of introspection

Re:About the security content of iOS 14.7.1 and iPadOS 14.7.1 by the_dune_13 on Tuesday July 27, 2021 @03:07AM (#27969496)
> tere is no reason to think a closed ecosystem is more secure than an open one

Fragmentation of Android is a thing.

Re:About the security content of iOS 14.7.1 and iPadOS 14.7.1 by sudosysgen on Tuesday July 27, 2021 @08:52AM (#27971796)
It is a thing, yes, but it is avoidable nowadays. If it weren't already a thing Google could force Project Treble onto everyone and strong-arm the carriers from the beginning and it would not be an issue.