Non-surprise of the millennium. :-\
The only surprise is that Apple didn't sue the fool into complete bankruptcy.

Beeper Mini Throws in the Towel
-------------------------------
It's moving on to its "mission beyond iMesage."

Beeper appears to have officially given up on the cat-and-mouse
game it's been engaged in with Apple to try and provide a
seamless iMessage solution for Android users following a final
death blow by Apple earlier this month.

Although Beeper's multi-platform message service has been
around for a few years, it raised the ire of Apple when it
found a loophole last fall that allowed it to register Android
devices as clients with Apple's iMessage servers. From this
discovery, a new app, Beeper Mini, was born.

Technically speaking, Beeper reverse-engineered the iMessage
protocol, figuring out how an iPhone legitimately connects to
Apple's servers and then applying that same technique to allow
Android devices to get on board by pretending to be iPhones.

In its original form, Beeper Mini worked brilliantly well,
allowing an Android device's phone number to be registered as an
iMessage address and letting Android users participate as full
"blue-bubble" participants in iMessage conversations.

As clever as it was, Apple was decidedly not impressed with
Beeper's stunt. It took less than three days for Apple to pull
the plug and block these phone number registrations from its
servers. After all, it probably wasn't too hard for Apple to
figure out that the devices registering with its servers
weren't actually iPhones.

Nevertheless, Beeper Mini continued to function by having users
switch over to using Apple IDs and communicating with an email
address instead of a phone number. That was a bit more fiddly
and less seamless, but it got the job done, and Android users
could keep chatting away with their iPhone counterparts for
another few days before Apple got wise to the new technique and
blocked that, too.

As a result, Beeper was forced to switch back to a method
similar to what it debuted three years ago, relying on a Mac to
act as an intermediary of sorts. However, unlike the original
Beeper, which used the Mac (or a jailbroken iPhone) as a relay,
Beeper figured out a way to "clone" the registration information
from a Mac.

This allowed Beeper Mini to continue connecting directly to
Apple's iMessage servers rather than relying on the Mac to
exchange messages on its behalf. Beeper Mini basically reused
the registration token created by a legitimate connection from a
Mac to Apple's iMessage services. Since Messages for macOS is an
authorized iMessage client made by Apple, presumably, Apple
wouldn't detect it as invalid and block it.

Or so Beeper thought.

It turns out that Apple figured out what was going on and, in
something of a "scorched earth" approach, began blocking Macs
that were being used as proxies for Beeper Mini.

It's not entirely clear how Apple was doing this, but it doesn't
appear to have specifically been a punitive move. The Apple IDs
used on those Macs weren't blocked from iMessage, as it continued
to work fine on the iPhone and iPad and even on other Macs that
didn't have the Beeper app installed. Since every device that
accesses iMessage gets a unique registration token, Apple was
likely detecting the same token being used by more than one
device and blocking it entirely. The Macs were merely collateral
damage in this case.

While the problem doesn't appear to have affected every Beeper
Mini user, the company has clearly decided this is no longer a
battle worth fighting. Today, the company announced that it's
removing the Beeper Mini app from the Google Play Store and will
no longer provide support or troubleshooting.

Instead, the company is moving to its "mission beyond iMessage"
- to build "a universal, multi-network chat app." Folks
successfully using Beeper Mini can continue to do so, but when
and if it stops or if they have any other problems, they'll be
on their own.

If iMessage currently works for you in Beeper Cloud today, that's
great! But please be aware that we no longer provide support or
troubleshooting for any iMessage-related issues. If it doesn't
work, we're truly sorry - at this time we've done what we can
(especially given that Beeper is a free app).

Beeper also added that it's open-sourced its iMessage bridge "for
those who would like to continue the fight" and says it may even
revisit the project in the future. Ultimately, it hopes that
Apple will be "forced to see the light" by regulators, but that's
a grey area at best since iMessage is hardly the only messaging
platform available on the iPhone, and it's not even the most
popular one, at least outside of the US. It's far more likely
that Apple's implementation of RCS later this year will appease
antitrust concerns by providing equal footing for a more modern
open standard.

<https://www.idropnews.com/news/beeper-mini-throws-in-the-towel/206603/>

On 2024-01-29 05:25:29 +0000, Your Name said:

> Non-surprise of the millennium. :-\
> The only surprise is that Apple didn't sue the fool into complete bankruptcy.
>
>
>
> Beeper Mini Throws in the Towel
> -------------------------------
> It's moving on to its "mission beyond iMesage."
>
> Beeper appears to have officially given up on the cat-and-mouse
> game it's been engaged in with Apple to try and provide a
> seamless iMessage solution for Android users following a final
> death blow by Apple earlier this month.
<snip>
>
> ... Ultimately, it hopes that Apple will be "forced to see the
> light" by regulators, but that's a grey area at best since
> iMessage is hardly the only messaging platform available on the
> iPhone, and it's not even the most popular one, at least outside
> of the US. It's far more likely that Apple's implementation of
> RCS later this year will appease antitrust concerns by providing
> equal footing for a more modern open standard.

Since when is having a propritery format for your app's data an
"antiturst" problem??

If the lawmakers are going down that moronically stupid route, then
almost every developer around is going to have legal problems, as well
us as having less secure apps. Forget a secure password manager (for
example) because everyone else is going to "have to" be allowed to
access the data format. :-\

On 1/29/2024 12:30 AM, Your Name wrote:
> On 2024-01-29 05:25:29 +0000, Your Name said:
>
>> Non-surprise of the millennium.  :-\
>> The only surprise is that Apple didn't sue the fool into complete
>> bankruptcy.
>>
>>
>>
>>     Beeper Mini Throws in the Towel
>>     -------------------------------
>>     It's moving on to its "mission beyond iMesage."
>>
>>     Beeper appears to have officially given up on the cat-and-mouse
>>     game it's been engaged in with Apple to try and provide a
>>     seamless iMessage solution for Android users following a final
>>     death blow by Apple earlier this month.
> <snip>
>>
>>     ... Ultimately, it hopes that Apple will be "forced to see the
>>     light" by regulators, but that's a grey area at best since
>>     iMessage is hardly the only messaging platform available on the
>>     iPhone, and it's not even the most popular one, at least outside
>>     of the US. It's far more likely that Apple's implementation of
>>     RCS later this year will appease antitrust concerns by providing
>>     equal footing for a more modern open standard.
>
> Since when is having a propritery format for your app's data an
> "antiturst" problem??
>
> If the lawmakers are going down that moronically stupid route, then
> almost every developer around is going to have legal problems, as well
> us as having less secure apps. Forget a secure password manager (for
> example) because everyone else is going to "have to" be allowed to
> access the data format.  :-\

This is NOT an antitrust issue. Al of this stems from the mistaken
belief - first spouted by the moron in charge of Epic Games - that Apple
is a "monopoly".

You CAN'T have a "monopoly" on your own product. That's not how it
works. Monopolies exist in markets, not products. The market here is
phones. There are PLENTY of choices besides Apple. If Apple had 95%
of the phone market, THEN these fools would have a point. Apple has
around 25% of the global market.

Why don't we force Toyota to "see the light" and allow me to buy a Camry
with a Honda engine? Toyota has a "monopoly" on Camrys!

See how ridiculous that sounds?

Apple does not owe anyone anything. If you want to make money from
Apple's products, then you follow Apple's rules. If you want to use
iMessage, then get an iPhone/iPad/Mac.

If you don't like the rules then too bad. You are free to not support
Apple. No one is forcing you to support Apple. No one is forcing you
buy an iPhone. No one is forcing you to buy a Toyota.

On 2024-01-29, Nick Charles <the.thin@man> wrote:
> On 1/29/2024 12:30 AM, Your Name wrote:
>> On 2024-01-29 05:25:29 +0000, Your Name said:
>>
>>> Non-surprise of the millennium.  :-\
>>> The only surprise is that Apple didn't sue the fool into complete
>>> bankruptcy.
>>>
>>>     Beeper Mini Throws in the Towel
>>>     -------------------------------
>>>     It's moving on to its "mission beyond iMesage."
>>>
>>>     Beeper appears to have officially given up on the cat-and-mouse
>>>     game it's been engaged in with Apple to try and provide a
>>>     seamless iMessage solution for Android users following a final
>>>     death blow by Apple earlier this month.
>> <snip>
>>>
>>>     ... Ultimately, it hopes that Apple will be "forced to see the
>>>     light" by regulators, but that's a grey area at best since
>>>     iMessage is hardly the only messaging platform available on the
>>>     iPhone, and it's not even the most popular one, at least outside
>>>     of the US. It's far more likely that Apple's implementation of
>>>     RCS later this year will appease antitrust concerns by providing
>>>     equal footing for a more modern open standard.
>>
>> Since when is having a propritery format for your app's data an
>> "antiturst" problem??
>>
>> If the lawmakers are going down that moronically stupid route, then
>> almost every developer around is going to have legal problems, as well
>> us as having less secure apps. Forget a secure password manager (for
>> example) because everyone else is going to "have to" be allowed to
>> access the data format.  :-\
>
> This is NOT an antitrust issue. Al of this stems from the mistaken
> belief - first spouted by the moron in charge of Epic Games - that Apple
> is a "monopoly".
>
> You CAN'T have a "monopoly" on your own product. That's not how it
> works. Monopolies exist in markets, not products. The market here is
> phones. There are PLENTY of choices besides Apple. If Apple had 95%
> of the phone market, THEN these fools would have a point. Apple has
> around 25% of the global market.
>
> Why don't we force Toyota to "see the light" and allow me to buy a Camry
> with a Honda engine? Toyota has a "monopoly" on Camrys!
>
> See how ridiculous that sounds?
>
> Apple does not owe anyone anything. If you want to make money from
> Apple's products, then you follow Apple's rules. If you want to use
> iMessage, then get an iPhone/iPad/Mac.
>
> If you don't like the rules then too bad. You are free to not support
> Apple. No one is forcing you to support Apple. No one is forcing you
> buy an iPhone. No one is forcing you to buy a Toyota.

That pretty much sums it up. These people think Apple owes them
something, or they simply want to see Apple hurt in some way. It's lame.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On 29 Jan 2024 17:18:10 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

> That pretty much sums it up. These people think Apple owes them
> something, or they simply want to see Apple hurt in some way. It's lame.

Apple put a server on the Internet just like every other company does.
What Beeper proved is what Google had proved - which is Apple QA stinks.

On Mon, 29 Jan 2024 10:01:43 -0500, Nick Charles wrote:

> Apple does not owe anyone anything. If you want to make money from
> Apple's products, then you follow Apple's rules. If you want to use
> iMessage, then get an iPhone/iPad/Mac.

You're missing the whole point. Nobody wants the iPhone/iPad/Mac.
They want the Apple Internet Server (and the customers it reaches).

If people find a legal way to use that server, then Apple can only stop
them by legal means, where an example is Google puts out a YouTube server
and there are plenty of apps which access youtube videos for free.

Those apps do things that the consumer wants them to do, which the official
YouTube app doesn't do (like watch videos without ads & downloading them).

Beeper had found a way to access Apple's servers legally, which is why
Apple won't/can't sue them any more than Google won't/can't sue the youtube
downloaders or the youtube clones which do what the people want them to do.

If Google/Apple could have sued, they would have. They didn't. They won't.
(They can sue, but they know they'd lose, so they won't.)

In the end, it proved there are always huge holes in Apple's protocols,
but this hole Apple plugged after only a month or two which is quick for
Apple who usually leaves untested holes for years (as Google proved).

On 2024-01-29 12:37, Sten deJoode wrote:
> On 29 Jan 2024 17:18:10 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> That pretty much sums it up. These people think Apple owes them
>> something, or they simply want to see Apple hurt in some way. It's lame.
>
> Apple put a server on the Internet just like every other company does.
> What Beeper proved is what Google had proved - which is Apple QA stinks.

Whatever...

....Arlen.

On 29. Jan 2024 at 21:37:44 CET, "Sten deJoode" <StendeJood@nospam.net>
wrote:

> Apple put a server on the Internet just like every other company does.

Just like any bank does...

On 30 Jan 2024 07:11:03 GMT, Bernd Froehlich wrote:

>> Apple put a server on the Internet just like every other company does.
>
> Just like any bank does...

I said every company. That includes banks. And people who make doughnuts.

What is interesting is the Apple posters think this is about the iPhone.
They don't understand it's not about the iPhone but about the server.

You have to wonder why these Apple posters can't understand the issues.

Nobody on Android wants the iPhone (otherwise the iPhone would have more
than 15% market compared to Android's utter domination of the world TAM).

What people want in this case isn't the iPhone - but that server.

Because only because that server does two things that some people want.
1. That server allows them to send MMS attachments for free
2. That server reaches 15% of the world market.

Apple wrote the server code using probably high school dropouts.
So Beeper took advantage of the poor coding which Apple never tested.

Even Google proved Apple never tested a huge portion of their code.
So all Beeper proved, in the end, is Apple sucks at writing code.

Apple's inability to write secure code is one reason there are three times
as many zero-day holes in iOS than in Android & ten times the exploits.
https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog

On 2024-01-30 04:24, Sten deJoode wrote:
> On 30 Jan 2024 07:11:03 GMT, Bernd Froehlich wrote:
>
>>> Apple put a server on the Internet just like every other company does.
>>
>> Just like any bank does...
>
> I said every company. That includes banks. And people who make doughnuts.
>
> What is interesting is the Apple posters think this is about the iPhone.
> They don't understand it's not about the iPhone but about the server.

Clearly pointed out it is indeed about Apple's servers many times. And
to have access to said servers: buy Apple products. Otherwise get your
own server.

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

On 2024-01-30, Sten deJoode <StendeJood@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 30 Jan 2024 07:11:03 GMT, Bernd Froehlich wrote:
>
>>> Apple put a server on the Internet just like every other company
>>> does.
>>
>> Just like any bank does...
>
> I said every company. That includes banks. And people who make
> doughnuts.
>
> What is interesting is the Apple posters think this is about the
> iPhone.

Nope, it's about the iMessage *service* - always has been. Adults will
notice that the only person here desperately trying to claim it's
supposedly about iPhones is *you*. This is typical Arlen behavior, where
he tries to misrepresent what other people say in order to fabricate an
illogical position out of thin air. Arlen's intellect is both boring and
lame.

> Because only because that server does two things that some people
> want.

And those people can buy an Apple device to use Apple's servers.
Otherwise, they can fuck right off.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 09:01:44 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:

> Clearly pointed out it is indeed about Apple's servers many times. And
> to have access to said servers: buy Apple products. Otherwise get your
> own server.

We agree on everything you just said.
It's good you understand it was always about Apple's mainframe servers.

Apple built a system which turns the iPhone into a dumb terminal for the
purpose of all the things you like about Apple's server-based messaging.

That dumb-terminal iPhone was designed to require the use of Apple
mainframes to do the nice things you like about Apple's messaging system.

Beeper wanted some of those nice things that the mainframe model provides.
So Beeper took advantage of Apple's inability to code a secure server.

Apple subsequently closed the (multiple) loopholes that Beeper exploited.

It's no different a process when the hackers exploit a zero-day zero-click
hole in Apple's messaging implementation (five of which were this year!).

1. Apple puts out insecure server code.
2. Hackers exploit that insecure server code.
3. Apple subsequently patches the insecure server code.

Beeper didn't do anything different than what hackers do all the time.

Just like hackers serve the needs of their customer base, Beeper was only
serving the needs of its customer base. Only Apple finally plugged it up.

On 2024-01-30 10:31, Sten deJoode wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 09:01:44 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
>
>> Clearly pointed out it is indeed about Apple's servers many times. And
>> to have access to said servers: buy Apple products. Otherwise get your
>> own server.
>
> We agree on everything you just said.
> It's good you understand it was always about Apple's mainframe servers.

Do you even know what a "mainframe server" is, Arlen?

>
> Apple built a system which turns the iPhone into a dumb terminal for the
> purpose of all the things you like about Apple's server-based messaging.

Nope.

>
> That dumb-terminal iPhone was designed to require the use of Apple
> mainframes to do the nice things you like about Apple's messaging system.
>

Do you even know what a "mainframe" is, Arlen?

> Beeper wanted some of those nice things that the mainframe model provides.
> So Beeper took advantage of Apple's inability to code a secure server.

No. That's not what Beeper did.

>
> Apple subsequently closed the (multiple) loopholes that Beeper exploited.
>
> It's no different a process when the hackers exploit a zero-day zero-click
> hole in Apple's messaging implementation (five of which were this year!).
>
> 1. Apple puts out insecure server code.
> 2. Hackers exploit that insecure server code.
> 3. Apple subsequently patches the insecure server code.
>
> Beeper didn't do anything different than what hackers do all the time.
>
> Just like hackers serve the needs of their customer base, Beeper was only
> serving the needs of its customer base. Only Apple finally plugged it up.

Beeper was trying to build a customer base using Apple's proprietary
services.

That's basically theft.