RCS doesn’t really do a whole lot of anything. It’s a step up from SMS/MMS, but not by much.
All the features people think they mean when they’re talking about RCS are proprietary Google extensions that only work if you go through Google’s servers. They’re basically exactly the same as Apple putting iMessage on top; Apple just brags about it while Google tries to trick you into thinking incompatibility is someone else’s fault for not giving them control.
Usually I’ll defend Apple on this, but yes it’s a step up from SMS, and Apple is a big reason RCS hadnt been widely adopted as a replacement, and incremented to include more features.
I’m definitely on Googles side here: years of no one doing anything until “fine, I’ll take care it myself”
That’s precisely what E2EE is supposed to prevent. If the phone company gets hacked, attackers can see all the traffic going through all of their towers, so if everything is encrypted before getting to the towers, they can’t see the contents. IIRC, metadata like phone numbers can be read though, so they can see who you’re talking to, but they can’t see what you’re saying.
The phone manufacturer, however, can see everything before it’s encrypted and after it’s decrypted.
At this point you have to assume that if you are not using your own install of custom Android ROM, your end point is not secure beyond keeping stupid criminals out
Ive been slowly hearing about this over the last week or so, and I couldnt tell if it was real news or just over exaggerated.
And everyone has been on an on about iphone to android RCS, but no word on if anything is being done to fix the vulnerability.
What vulnerability? I thought RCS is encrypted on transit
RCS doesn’t really do a whole lot of anything. It’s a step up from SMS/MMS, but not by much.
All the features people think they mean when they’re talking about RCS are proprietary Google extensions that only work if you go through Google’s servers. They’re basically exactly the same as Apple putting iMessage on top; Apple just brags about it while Google tries to trick you into thinking incompatibility is someone else’s fault for not giving them control.
Usually I’ll defend Apple on this, but yes it’s a step up from SMS, and Apple is a big reason RCS hadnt been widely adopted as a replacement, and incremented to include more features.
I’m definitely on Googles side here: years of no one doing anything until “fine, I’ll take care it myself”
Apple didn’t bother because it sucks. It’s not an actual solution (or path to one) for messaging not to be a dumpster fire.
Google “did it itself” exclusively for control. It’s exactly the same as their browser behavior.
it at least allows larger files than mms* and has reactions.
*size may vary significantly with MMS and is rarely if ever communicated.
Why would you defend Apple? It’s just a stupid form of lock-in, it was at the start, and it always will be.
If you want security, use an app that provides security. RCS does a little to protect against MITM attacks, unless that MITM is your OS vendor.
I was under the impression Apple already allows RCS, and that RCS is E2EE, I was wrong.
Apple did add RCS in one of the iOS 18 updates.
It’s just only E2EE when routed through Google.
Article is about phone company being hacked, so there’s a good chance that even if we had non-proprietary encryption, they’d be able to read it
That’s precisely what E2EE is supposed to prevent. If the phone company gets hacked, attackers can see all the traffic going through all of their towers, so if everything is encrypted before getting to the towers, they can’t see the contents. IIRC, metadata like phone numbers can be read though, so they can see who you’re talking to, but they can’t see what you’re saying.
The phone manufacturer, however, can see everything before it’s encrypted and after it’s decrypted.
At this point you have to assume that if you are not using your own install of custom Android ROM, your end point is not secure beyond keeping stupid criminals out