Apple Says It's Already Fixed Many WikiLeaks Security Issues (usatoday.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from USA Today: Apple says many of the vulnerabilities to its devices and software that came to light in WikiLeaks' revelations of CIA cyber weapons were already fixed in its latest updates. Late Tuesday, Apple emailed the following statement to USA TODAY: "Apple is deeply committed to safeguarding our customers' privacy and security. The technology built into today's iPhone represents the best data security available to consumers, and we're constantly working to keep it that way. Our products and software are designed to quickly get security updates into the hands of our customers, with nearly 80 percent of users running the latest version of our operating system. While our initial analysis indicates that many of the issues leaked today were already patched in the latest OS, we will continue work to rapidly address any identified vulnerabilities. We always urge customers to download the latest iOS to make sure they have the most recent security updates." For its part, Samsung emailed its own statement Wednesday: "Protecting consumers' privacy and the security of our devices is a top priority at Samsung. We are aware of the report in question and are urgently looking into the matter."

Comments

Good.

[BronsCon]

I'm glad to see positive response across the board, from Apple, Samsung, and I'm sure others. Especially Apple and Samsung, though, as I have many devices from both of them in my home.

Re:Good.

[pushing-robot]

Who cares? A response doesn't have to be original to be appropriate and sincere.

"My cat died yesterday."
"Oh, I'm sorry for your loss."
"You're 'sorry.' Everybody's 'sorry!' What kind of generic bullshit sentiment is that?! Make an effort next time, asshole!"
"I am no longer sorry."

Re:Good.

[rtb61]

When Apple are selling privacy as a premium over M$ and the Windows probe, not bullshit any more but a serious full on business principle that will win the their market. Privacy is pretty much becoming Apple's most valuable selling point (consider the poor get free and probed again and again and again ad infinitum not right to freedom and the better off pay for and get privacy and they will pay a premium for it ie freedom ain't free nowadays and you have to pay for it, want to be free of the probe prodding and a pounding up there, then you will have to pay and even when you pay in M$s case ha ha pound your privacy harder).

There is billions in protecting privacy and make no mistake, you could imagine a company like Apple starting to sue people who invade the privacy of Apple customers via Apple devices (very, very expensive suits as they are also a financial attack on Apple, you can not sell privacy if they steal it from you, and I am talking Apples privacy that they are selling). Privacy is becoming serious business, really serious business.

Not Buying It

[PeteJanda]

Anyone other than me believe that Apple, Samsung et al. (at a minimum) didn't look the other way before the Wikileaks dump? The OS-level issues really were unknowns for a long enough time that the CIA and other agencies could develop and deploy a playbook for hacking high value targets? What about the other elephant in the room... firmware?

Re:Not Buying It

[larkost]

That would be pretty silly for Apple, since now anyone who cares to download and figure out the exploits can test them for themselves. Someone checking them on this would be easy, and a huge black eye for Apple. You really are off into conspiracy theory territory.

Now companies need spies in the CIA/FBI

[yorgasor]

Since the CIA & FBI are keeping the vulnerabilities they find secret, these companies just need to start planting spies in the CIA & FBI to find out what bugs they have on their software.

Re:Nope

[93 Escort Wagon]

TrueCrypt FDE on a laptop stored in a safe.

... encased in cement sitting on Mars.

Keep an eye out for Unlocked Phones

[SeattleLawGuy]

I'm glad to see positive response across the board, from Apple, Samsung, and I'm sure others. Especially Apple and Samsung, though, as I have many devices from both of them in my home.

Keep an eye out for updates on "Unlocked" Phones that have switched networks. For some insane reason phones are marketed as "unlocked" when they can be used on another carrier's network, but *the security updates don't work* if you use them on the other network. These should probably be considered unmarketable and therefore not unlocked--and there should be a convenient way to pull signed security updates from the manufacturer instead of the carrier. Samsung and Apple issuing patches doesn't help if Verizon and AT&T fail to talk to each other enough for users on both networks to get the security updates, regardless of who originally installed a given phone's O/S.

The difference

[SuperKendall]

Apple is actually capable of making things relatively secure and makes choices that are unpopular but increase security (walled garden, deep restrictions on app access to platform, signing Mac apps required by default). They are looking out for people who truly cannot and will not understand security around technical devices.

Samsung meanwhile may talk a good security game, but they put out truly half-assed effort with a billion exploit channels. How about TV's that can record audio and have full android installations to exploit? They put zero thought in how to handle the security implications of this system (to be fair, Amazon and Google are not far behind with Alexa like devices). Samsung and other companies consider user convenience first and security second - if at all.

As for the rest of your absurd anti-Trump fantasy - Russia expected Hillary to win too. They only reason they gathered so much from the DNC was so that they'd have dirt to hold over on Hillary!

Trump had zero to do with Russian hacks, I would love to hear your frothing rabid explanation for how exactly Russia "hacked the election". After all, all the hackers every did was show us what Hillary and the rest of teh elite DNC members said and did when people were not looking. Hillary lost because she is even more Hillary than people thought, not because Russia.