Andy Greenberg writes about security problems in iMessage and Safari, saying that these products make iPhone less secure.
“If you want to compromise an iPhone, these are the best ways to do it,” says independent security researcher Linus Henze of the two apps…He and other iOS researchers argue that when it comes to the security of both iMessage and WebKit—the browser engine that serves as the foundation not just of Safari but all iOS browsers—iOS suffers from Apple’s preference for its own code above that of other companies.
Apple is in a tough position. If a company isn’t great at security, they could get a third-party to audit its software. But that would create a huge target.
Check It Out: iMessage and Safari Make iPhones Less Secure
So the guy writing the article thinks that Apple can provide more security by allowing other than WebKit? They’d end up with 2, 3, or 4 or more browsers to check security of? They’d end up with 2, 3, or 4 more times theffort and end up with 2, 3, or 4 times as many problems (not just security).
Silly nonsense. Keep it simple
“If a company isn’t great at security, they could get a third-party to audit its software…” Didn’t Apple just greatly increase their bug bounty? Yes, it’s better to catch bugs before they are released, rather than after, but it seems like security is something that Apple is paying more attention to. Also, does any other major technology player invite third parties in to inspect their codebase or system architecture for security issues? That would seems like a potential door for security breaches, right there.