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."
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.
"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.
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?
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
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