Apple says researchers can explore aspects of child safety. But this lawsuit is a start to that being done.
In 2019, Apple filed a lawsuit against Corellium, which allowed security researchers to cheaply and quickly test mobile devices by copying their software rather than asking to access physical devices. The software, which also mimics Android devices, can be used to fix those problems.
In the lawsuit, Apple arguing that Corellium infringed its copyrights, activated the sale of the software exploits used for the hacking, and did not need to exist. The startup has objected to claiming that its use of Apple code is a classic protected fair use case. The judge has largely sided with Corellium so far. About a two -year case settled last week – days after the company’s CSAM technology was made public.
On Monday, Corellium Office has partnered a $ 15,000 will be given for a program that is specifically promoted as a way to look at iPhones under a microscope and hold Apple accountable. On Tuesday, Apple filed a appeal continuing the lawsuit.
In an interview with the MIT Technology Review, Corellium chief operating officer Matt Tait, said Federighi’s comments were not the same as reality.
“That’s a very cheap thing for Apple to say,” he said. “There’s a lot of heavy lifting going on with that statement.”
“IOS is designed in a way that is actually very difficult for people to inspect system services.”
He’s not the only one disputing Apple’s position.
“Apple prioritizes the ability of a researcher to examine the entire system,” said David Thiel, chief technology officer at Stanford’s Internet Observatory. Thiel, the author of a book called iOS Security Security, tweet that the company would spend heavily to prevent the same thing it claimed to be possible.
“It requires a peripheral system with high exploitation values, dubious origin binaries, and immature devices,” he writes. “Apple is spending a much larger amount to prevent this and it will be difficult to do such research.”
Accountability in surveillance
If you want to see exactly how Apple’s complex new tech works, you can’t simply look inside the iPhone operating system you bought in the store. The security company’s “wall garden” approach helped solve some important problems, but it also means that the phone is designed to keep visitors out – whether they like it or not.
(Android phones, meanwhile, vary by standard. While iPhones are famously locked, all you need to do to unlock an Android plug into a USB device is install the developer tools , and get the highest level of root access.)
Apple’s approach means that researchers are left locked in an endless battle with the company to try to get the level of understanding they need.
There are a number of possible ways Apple and security researchers can prove that no government is armed with new features of the company’s child safety, though.