Slashdot Mirror


Apple Agrees To Chinese Security Audits of Its Products

itwbennett writes According to a story in the Beijing News, Apple CEO Tim Cook has agreed to let China's State Internet Information Office to run security audits on products the company sells in China in an effort to counter concerns that other governments are using its devices for surveillance. "Apple CEO Tim Cook agreed to the security inspections during a December meeting in the U.S. with information office director Lu Wei, according to a story in the Beijing News. China has become one of Apple’s biggest markets, but the country needs assurances that Apple devices like the iPhone and iPad protect the security and privacy of their users as well as maintain Chinese national security, Lu told Cook, according to an anonymous source cited by the Beijing News."

57 of 114 comments (clear)

  1. Absolutely fair.. by Rick+in+China · · Score: 2, Insightful

    More countries should be doing security audits on more products.

    1. Re:Absolutely fair.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Security Audits" - In other words, making sure these governments have a way to access secure information stored on confiscated iPhones from activists, dissidents, journalists, and other troublemakers.

    2. Re:Absolutely fair.. by bloodhawk · · Score: 2

      It is common practice for most countries, the only thing new here is a western country letting china do it too.

    3. Re:Absolutely fair.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, it says "protect the security and privacy of their users". Are you accusing them of lying?

    4. Re:Absolutely fair.. by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      "Security Audits" - In other words, making sure these governments have a way to access secure information stored on confiscated iPhones from activists, dissidents, journalists, and other troublemakers.

      How would a security audit achieve this? Just curious. I'm sure you know a lot more about this than I do.

    5. Re:Absolutely fair.. by weilawei · · Score: 3, Informative

      I believe the GP was suggesting that the phrase "security audit" was being used in a euphemistic manner.

    6. Re:Absolutely fair.. by bouldin · · Score: 1

      Here in America, we don't even audit our damn voting machines.

      Unmodified, general purpose COTS non-voting software (e.g., operating systems, programming language compilers, data base management systems, and Web browsers) is not subject to the detailed examinations specified in this section. However, the accredited test lab shall examine such software to confirm the specific version of software being used against the design specification to confirm that the software has not been modified. Portions of COTS software that have been modified by the vendor in any manner are subject to review.

      The parts of the standard that actually cover auditing the voting code aren't exactly thorough, either. After all, democracy, schmemocracy!

    7. Re:Absolutely fair.. by swb · · Score: 2

      This was my first thought -- it's a search not for security of the devices, but a search for exploits of these devices and/or some form of industrial espionage.

      But I wonder -- can Apple set the terms of the audit? Ie, you get to examine whatever it is you examine in our office using our provided systems which aren't connected to the Internet. You may not bring any electronic devices into the audit facility. You may not reproduce any code you review in our facility by any means, including notes, pseudocode, block diagrams, etc.

      I suppose there's still some risk -- ie, deliberate subterfuge involving copying in some way or the use of a memory savant or some error so obvious they know how to attack it without any information exfiltrated.

      I don't know, but I also assume that a truly thorough security audit of a large, novel (ie, you didn't write it) code base is hard and may be dependent on 2nd order effects, like the actual generated object code. Which may make it extremely time-consuming -- didn't the funded audit of TrueCrypt take an extremely long time just to do the initial audit?

    8. Re:Absolutely fair.. by gtall · · Score: 1

      That, and I wonder how intrusive are the security audits. I wouldn't put it past the Chinese government to think of the security audits as a legal way to steal technology ideas.

    9. Re:Absolutely fair.. by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      I believe the GP was suggesting that the phrase "security audit" was being used in a euphemistic manner.

      And in what alternate universe would Apple agree to a euphemistic security audit?

    10. Re:Absolutely fair.. by gnasher719 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Consider that China is legally allowed to do security audits or "security audits" on any open source system. So what would Apple have to be afraid of that Linux or OpenSSL just as examples don't have to be afraid of?

    11. Re:Absolutely fair.. by weilawei · · Score: 1

      I can't really answer that, since I don't have any information on their internals, thus, I'd be speculating. I was merely pointing out what the GP appeared to be saying.

      Do I agree with the GP? No idea. It's rather difficult to pass judgement on things without any actual details. I'd prefer to skip speculation and just wait for the results.

    12. Re:Absolutely fair.. by Muad'Dave · · Score: 1

      In a world where several BILLION up-and-coming wage earners are ripe to purchase their products, which, incidentally, wouldn't exist if not for the cheap labor still extant in that very same country.

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    13. Re:Absolutely fair.. by swb · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Fear one may just be outright industrial espionage.

      I'm guessing that security in Apple products goes above and beyond whatever (likely modified) FOSS libraries they use, but would also include stuff like their whole-disk encryption system, the touch ID sensor and its encodings, etc. So there's a fair amount of proprietary tech in these devices.

      Fear two might be obtaining what amount to currently unknown zero-day exploits that could conceivably open all iDevices to security risks exploitable by Chinese intelligence.

      AFAIK, recent models and OS levels have a generally accepted level of security that makes them difficult to break or exploit and I think this has come to be seen as a competitive advantage. Even if the security is beatable by the NSA in a lab situation, the marketing value is to businesses worried about lost devices or devices used in vertical markets with security compliance regulations.

      Which is why I wondered how much Apple can control the terms of a security audit. Do the the Chinese just get handed a memory stick with ios-82-iphone6-source.tgz they can take back to their office or do they sit in a plain white room with locked down desktops that do a one-way remote console to a machine with source code? Or worse, a plain white room with a bunch of binders of printed source code?

    14. Re:Absolutely fair.. by Minupla · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Hrmm, this might work out well for us non-govt people.

      Consider:

      NSA: "Apple, you must let us 'review' your code. We'll keep our findings to ourselves, you can't tell anyone"
      Apple: "OK"
      NSA digs through code, finds exploits, locks them up for future weaponization ...
      China: "Apple, we'd like to "review" your code. We're going to tell the world about it"
      Apple: "OK"
      NSA: "Crap, now those evyl Chinese will find our exploits. Darn, I guess we'd better tell Apple to fix them after all or the Chinese will be spying on us!

      At the end of the day, the best we can hope for is that the various spooks keep each other honest.

      Min

      --
      On the whole, I find that I prefer Slashdot posts to twitter ones because I don't get limited to 140 chars before
    15. Re:Absolutely fair.. by stealth_finger · · Score: 2

      In a world where several BILLION up-and-coming wage earners are ripe to purchase their products, which, incidentally, wouldn't exist if not for the cheap labor still extant in that very same country.

      Maybe their regional ads will say 'Designed in California. Made in China'

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    16. Re:Absolutely fair.. by phayes · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What better way to learn what undiscovered security holes there are in a product than to be able to see the source code?

      Oh, you thought that the reason China wants to audit the code is so that they can "protect" their citizens. Yes, because not at all well known for targeting dissent, no, not at all...

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    17. Re:Absolutely fair.. by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      That's not all it says...

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    18. Re:Absolutely fair.. by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Losing the additional security that closed source gives over open source.

      Note that the phrase "There's no such thing as security through obscurity" is a nonsense. Security through obscurity alone is poor security. But it does indeed add a level of security when combined with other security practices.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    19. Re:Absolutely fair.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It means that they get to see the source code under NDA. They negotiated the same thing for Windows. Having source makes it a little easier to find exploits to add to an NSA-like arsenal backing a FOXACID-like system. Though it's possible to find exploits without source, it's natural for them to want every advantage they can get.

      Hopefully this is less of a big deal for Apple than it was for Windows since much of the Apple source code is already public: Darwin and WebKit. There's still a lot of closed-source attack surface, though.

      For ChromeOS it's a non-event because ChromiumOS is already open, and you can build ChromiumOS and run it on a Chromebook. Even the development head is open, unlike Android. The PDF reader and Flash runtime are not open, but at least they're sandboxed.

      I don't think the audit is useful for the stated purpose because Apple can choose what they hand over, and there's no "reproduceable build" like there is with Tor and soon Firefox. If Apple did insert back doors at NSA's request, not only would they have the opportunity to remove these backdoors from the audit, they might worry about being punished if they didn't.

      Normal software audits are requested by the auditee. Think about what you would want if you audited Huawei's source. There's no sane way to do it. If the auditee is adversarial, a software audit done in any normal way is worthless. But getting some Huawei source to hand to our spy agency so they could find more Huawei exploits is a great idea if we want to increase the reach of our global collection network.

      Tim Cook is therefore either really stupid, or doesn't care.

    20. Re: Absolutely fair.. by jd2112 · · Score: 1

      By 'users' I'm sure they actually mean the communst party elite...

      --
      Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
    21. Re:Absolutely fair.. by Etherwalk · · Score: 2

      Here in America, we don't even audit our damn voting machines.

      Because of, you know, whatever you vote, your slavery is totally determined by your EFFing "United States Electoral College".

      Unless you're in one of the few states that either has proportional representation or is a swing state. I have seriously considered moving to a swing state for that reason.

    22. Re:Absolutely fair.. by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      In a world where several BILLION up-and-coming wage earners are ripe to purchase their products, which, incidentally, wouldn't exist if not for the cheap labor still extant in that very same country.

      Maybe their regional ads will say 'Designed in California. Made in China'

      Probably should actually say 'Designed in California. Made in Taiwan, Japan, and Korea. Assembled in China.'

    23. Re:Absolutely fair.. by rtb61 · · Score: 2

      It depends what they are actually saying when they say they want to security audit the devices. I take that to mean complete access to the source code for all software supplied with the device and complete access to detailed hardware designs. So yep, a security audit will allow the Government of China to hunt down bugs and make use of them "to access secure information stored on confiscated iPhones from activists, dissidents, journalists, and other troublemakers". Likely it goes deeper than this and they want to access all possible associated Apple devices with or without the users permission upon a global basis and Apple is like 'meh' profits first. Apple users in the US better watch out, it's not like the Government of China's investigatory agencies are even slightly free of corruption and many of the 'er' hidden features they find are pretty much guaranteed to become available to organised crime.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    24. Re:Absolutely fair.. by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      "Security Audits" - In other words, making sure these governments have a way to access secure information stored on confiscated iPhones from activists, dissidents, journalists, and other troublemakers.

      Not necessarily. There are legitimate kinds of audits, too. In fact the U.S. should be doing more of them.

      We have already found foreign chips (guess where they were made) that were "backdoored", even in some military products. And others that were cheap forged copies of better chips.

      Whenever we have electronics that are important to not just military security but even just citizen privacy and dependence (like phones), we should be doing thorough security audits.

  2. Of Course by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Since most of their operations are in China (even if de facto), they are essentially a Chinese company. They have to agree.

    --
    -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
    1. Re: Of Course by kthreadd · · Score: 1

      They have outsourced parts of their business to companies in China, but that does not make them a Chinese company.

    2. Re: Of Course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The corruption?

    3. Re: Of Course by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 1

      Someone please explain to me why this would be flamebait? I am just pointing out facts that people here on Slashdot get modded up for all the time.

      --
      -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
    4. Re: Of Course by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

      It's Slashdot
      Facts that someone doesn't like are the ultimate flamebait.
      Pointing out logical flaws in an argument is trolling.
      Likely we ran into an anti America/Europe/West person or just pro Chinese/ child of their elite type

  3. Wait a second by codeButcher · · Score: 2

    I thought Apple products were assembled in China? (By chinese spies masquerading as low-wage workers, etc. etc. etc.)

    Also, Lenovo.

    --
    Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
    1. Re:Wait a second by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I don't think the assemble the code by hand any more.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:Wait a second by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I thought Apple products were assembled in China?

      Manufactured and assembled. They used to assemble parts for the US market in Sacramento, but they decided that they should keep the proceeds from the Mac tax instead of paying American workers to build products which are associated with America.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  4. this proves nothing whatsoever. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If Apple cooperates then how do they know the devices and software are exactly the same thing that Apple sells in China. The thing to do would be to acquire random samples in China and elsewhere jailbreak and then analyze. Never mind that Apple may not include obvious back doors but instead subtle behaviors that can be exploited and also explained away if discovered by outsiders.

    When push comes to shove it is all bullshit to use enemy technology. If I was in their shoes I would go for my own hardware and software developed without any input from the outside.

    They are probably more interested into breaking into existing I-devices so don't use these things what you want neither the US-G or the CN-G to know. That simple. Nobody is your friend here.

    1. Re:this proves nothing whatsoever. by Rick+in+China · · Score: 4, Funny

      If I was in their shoes

      You probably are in their shoes.

  5. Exploitable flaws by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It will enable the Chinese intelligence services to identify more currently unexploited flaws in the security of Apple's products. I doubt they will let Apple know of all the flaws that they find.

    I suspect also that Apple could not refuse to cooperate, and I would be surprised if the intelligence services in the USA are not doing precisely the same.

    I wonder if the Europeans are regretting the disembowelling of Nokia as a phone manufacturer?

    1. Re:Exploitable flaws by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If you could choose, would you have allowed or disallowed Apple to let China do this audit?

  6. Exploitable flaws by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Nokia failed in design and marketing. Why would "Europe" regret that? It's not like "Europe" could have helped a bit. That's just how market works. Besides, the same people are still making phones, only they run MS software now. Nice phones, I have one, good exchange sync, works as a phone, WhatsApp works, nice camera. UI looks better imho compared to iOS and android. Software ecosystem may lack a bit, but everything I need in a phone is available. I have android phone also, but it's sitting on a desk at home because I have no use for it.

    Doesn't really matter who spies my phone. I only live for a couple of decades anyways, if someone wants to waste their time spying on me I say good riddance, hope they found it interesting. I'm also sure it doesn't matter one bit who actually made the phone. If some entitity with sufficient funds wants to spy on them they will. IT's not like the information security is too strong on any of those.

  7. Chinese AC Convention? by catmistake · · Score: 1

    Chinese New Year
    Chinese Zodiac
    Chinese Opera
    Chinese Laundry
    Chinese Restaurants
    Chinese Checkers
    Chinese Doll
    Chinese Puzzle Box
    Chinese Room
    Chinese Medicine
    Chinese Handcuffs
    Chinese Security Audits

  8. Re:From the home of industrial espionage, China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    > the accusations against the US rely on baseless allegations from a cowardly individual.

    And the F35 is a good bird :)

  9. Better Chinese Clones by Hasaf · · Score: 2

    I was chatting with friends in China about this article. The immediate and unprompted comment was that this will allow the Chinese clone makers direct access to the coding in the Apple products

  10. Products? by maestroX · · Score: 1

    Does that include auditing MacOSX (integrated cloud services et al)?

  11. Why give China access to data by sabbede · · Score: 1

    that they won't disclose to us? I don't know if any of you have ever tried to get this info from Apple, but they really don't make it easy. Or possible.

    1. Re:Why give China access to data by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      that they won't disclose to us? I don't know if any of you have ever tried to get this info from Apple, but they really don't make it easy. Or possible.

      Just wait until the Chinese leak it online

  12. You are believing Lu and the GFW? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    How naive you are. Apple just wants to make money from Chinese market. They don't care about privacy.
    What Lu means is really, that you have to give your private key to us, or use the SMn ciphers(Chinese government home made ciphers, whether there are flaws or not, we don't know).

    -- one Chinese

  13. Another black mark by DriveDog · · Score: 1

    ...if that means the Chinese government gets to look at Apple's source code while Apple's customers do not.

  14. Nothing good can come of this. by mitcheli · · Score: 1

    So, what do we think? Will the Chinese Government use this opportunity to provide valuable input to Apple on security vulnerabilities that they discover to help better secure Apple products? Or will they squirrel away the things they discover to their Intel agencies? My bet's on the latter.

    --
    Select from tblFriends where interesting >= 4;
  15. Re:From the home of industrial espionage, China by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Also, home of industrial espionage would be the USA.

    I can't help but think of wooden shoes clogging machinery.

    Arguably, the home of industrial espionage would be either the UK or Germany. You need industry before you can have industrial espionage, so it seems like the proper powers for the era.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  16. Re:From the home of industrial espionage, China by DocSavage64109 · · Score: 1

    The mods seem to disagree with you.

  17. An "option" by gwstuff · · Score: 1

    Gee, I wonder what the other option was...

  18. Auditing security" sounds a lot better than... by plaidhacker · · Score: 1

    "Researching zero days"

  19. So is the converse true? by Rick+Zeman · · Score: 1

    Can the US demand to security audit any Chinese product? Can we demand to see the source/firmware of, say, Huwai routers?

  20. I don't think it's really a security audit by misosoup7 · · Score: 1

    The Chinese is most likely doing this as a response to the US banning ZTE and Huawei telecom products in the US. The US government is accusing ZTE and Huawei of building backdoors and other security concerns into their hardware, so China wants to hit back with something equally annoying. China is basically saying that's cool, we can screw with your companies too. Especially since China is a huge market to cell phone makers that most US companies have yet to really tap into. And with a huge growing middle class, the amount of profit for products like iPhone and Android based phones is huge. China is basically holding the iPhone hostage to get better treatment of its companies outside of China.

    1. Re:I don't think it's really a security audit by Rick+Zeman · · Score: 1

      The Chinese is most likely doing this as a response to the US banning ZTE and Huawei telecom products in the US. The US government is accusing ZTE and Huawei of building backdoors and other security concerns into their hardware, so China wants to hit back with something equally annoying. China is basically saying that's cool, we can screw with your companies too. Especially since China is a huge market to cell phone makers that most US companies have yet to really tap into. And with a huge growing middle class, the amount of profit for products like iPhone and Android based phones is huge. China is basically holding the iPhone hostage to get better treatment of its companies outside of China.

      The problem with that is the Chinese market craves iPhones and the US market couldn't care less about ZTE and Huawei products. All that'll do is piss off the Chinese with disposable incomes, "the growing middle class" and Chinese leaders will get voted out of office.

      Oh wait. It's a dictatorship.

  21. For what - to verify the Chinese malware? by jtara · · Score: 1

    Wait. Do you mean that Apple has just agreed to allow the Chinese to audit the Chinese-made iPhones that have Chinese malware that the Chinese put in to the iPhones that Apple is shipping from China to China? Next they will be wanting to audit the Chinese-made iPhones that have Chinese malware that the Chinese put in to the iPhones that Apple is shipping from China to the U.S. as well? Before or after the NSA interdicts the Chinese-made iPhones made in China by Chinese and shipped (via some secret stop-off) to the U.S.? Will they audit to make sure that both the Chinese and NSA-installed malware is still present?

  22. Re:From the home of industrial espionage, China by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

    I seem to recall tales of trade cities that were quite paranoid about outsiders learning their craft, some of which predated industrialized Great Britain or Germany by a rather large number of years.

    Perhaps the most well-known example is Murano, whose artistic glassblowing techniques were held in high esteem by the region. An older example would be Damascus metalworking, and I have vague recollections of similar industrial pride dating back to Egypt.

    I'm afraid my memory is not a particularly reliable source, but I believe there were often stiff penalties for trying to export the local expertise. Perhaps someone with a more complete knowledge of history can fill in the details...

    --
    You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
  23. Huh???? Chipping, anyone? by sgt_doom · · Score: 1

    But what about all those semiconductor chips out of China, which are part of those American drones, which allow Iran to bring them down (when they are illegally overflying their airspace)?

    The socialist response to Obama's SOTU:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    And the Real Obama:
    https://firstlook.org/theinter...