The Apple religious fundamentalists apparently never read the news.
They endlessly claim things even Apple wouldn't dare to claim.
Why?

Do they never read the news?

They even deny that bugs, which are widely reported, are in the Apple
products (such as the recent vast CocoPods vulnerabilities).

What's wrong with these Apple religious fundamentalists?

Is everyone as ignorant as they are?

Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
> The Apple religious fundamentalists apparently never read the news.
> They endlessly claim things even Apple wouldn't dare to claim.
> Why?
>
> Do they never read the news?
>
> They even deny that bugs, which are widely reported, are in the Apple
> products (such as the recent vast CocoPods vulnerabilities).
>
> What's wrong with these Apple religious fundamentalists?
>
> Is everyone as ignorant as they are?
>

Blind faith.

On 2024-07-04 09:00, badgolferman wrote:
> Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
>> The Apple religious fundamentalists apparently never read the news.
>> They endlessly claim things even Apple wouldn't dare to claim.
>> Why?
>>
>> Do they never read the news?
>>
>> They even deny that bugs, which are widely reported, are in the Apple
>> products (such as the recent vast CocoPods vulnerabilities).
>>
>> What's wrong with these Apple religious fundamentalists?
>>
>> Is everyone as ignorant as they are?
>>
>
> Blind faith.
>

I don't have "faith" about computers and technology.

I have experience.

On 2024-07-04, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> On 2024-07-04 09:00, badgolferman wrote:
>> Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> The Apple religious fundamentalists apparently never read the news.
>>> They endlessly claim things even Apple wouldn't dare to claim. Why?
>>>
>>> Do they never read the news?
>>>
>>> They even deny that bugs, which are widely reported, are in the
>>> Apple products (such as the recent vast CocoPods vulnerabilities).
>>>
>>> What's wrong with these Apple religious fundamentalists?
>>>
>>> Is everyone as ignorant as they are?
>>
>> Blind faith.
>
> I don't have "faith" about computers and technology.
>
> I have experience.

Note that nobody denied CocoaPods vulnerabilities - that's a lie.

Arlen and baldgolferman are projecting their own blind faith. They exude
ignorance of these topics, sling juvenile insults when corrected, and
brazenly lie in order to disrupt factual discourse due to their own
blind zealotry. When they are shown to be wrong, they just double down
on their lies and repeat their insults. It's pretty pathetic behavior.
They spend literal hours and hours trolling newsgroups of products for
which they hold irrational hatred daily. What a miserable existence.

--
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 2024-07-04, Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
>
> The Apple religious fundamentalists apparently never read the news.
> They endlessly claim things even Apple wouldn't dare to claim. Why?
>
> Do they never read the news?
>
> They even deny that bugs, which are widely reported, are in the Apple
> products (such as the recent vast CocoPods vulnerabilities).
>
> What's wrong with these Apple religious fundamentalists?
>
> Is everyone as ignorant as they are?

Why do you spend countless hours every day trolling newsgroups of
products for which you hold an irrational hatred, little Arlen?

Nobody in this news group denied the existence of CocoaPods
vulnerabilities, little Arlen. Why do you feel the need to lie?

Why do you have so much trouble understanding that the vulnerabilities
weren't in Apple software but in a repository system used not by Apple,
but by app developers?

And why didn't you know that an enormous number of open source
vulnerabilities remain unpatched for 10 years and longer?

Open source vulnerabilities remain unpatched for decades
<https://www.itweb.co.za/article/open-source-vulnerabilities-remain-unpatched-for-decades/wbrpO7gPwGdMDLZn>
---
A new report reveals an enormous number of identified open source
vulnerabilities remain unpatched for 10 years and longer, often because
organisations have no idea what open source code they are using.
..
..
..
With software developers routinely taking code from open source
repositories to embed in their company's products to speed up the
development process, saving time and money, manually tracking
components, their versions and their vulnerabilities is way beyond the
capabilities of most organisations.

The report recommends all organisations invest in an automated solution
for identifying and patching known vulnerabilities. "You can't patch
software if you don't know you are using it," the authors point out.
---

Your own ignorance is showing, little Arlen. Unbeknownst to you, these
CocoaPods vulnerabilities are not an uncommon phenomenon, and this is a
problem on all platforms.

--
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

Jolly Roger wrote on 4 Jul 2024 17:31:43 GMT :

> When they are shown to be wrong, they just double down
> on their lies and repeat their insults. It's pretty pathetic behavior.
> They spend literal hours and hours trolling newsgroups of products for
> which they hold irrational hatred daily. What a miserable existence.

It's no longer shocking that Jolly Roger lied for years about Apple
operating system support, when even Apple has publicly openly stated that
they have never simultaneously fully supported more than one release.

When the religious zealots finally heard that Apple was forced to admit
they had never fully supported more than one release, they resorted to
brazen and repeated lies claiming Apple's public admission was wrong.

They're *still* claiming Apple's own public admission is completely wrong!

What kind of strange person does that?

Jolly Roger wrote on 4 Jul 2024 17:37:39 GMT :

> Nobody in this news group denied the existence of CocoaPods

The question is asking whether everyone is as blissfully ignorant of what
Apple is as are you rather strange very loyal religious fundamentalists.

Not only do you never know anything about Apple vulnerabilities, Jolly
Roger, but you religious zealots immediately attack in crusader-like
fashion, anyone who even so much as dares to publish Apple vulnerabilities.

Who does that?

The first thing you always do is brazenly every vulnerability.

Then you frantically find a way to use whataboutism to blame everyone but
Apple for Apple's huge and many vulnerabilities due to lack of testing.

You blame Google for Apple's flaws. You blame Samsung. You blame Microsoft
too. You blame anyone but Apple for the huge flaws in the entire ecosystem.

Then, when you can no longer deflect the topic off the huge flaws in teh
Apple ecosystem, you then vehemently attack any bearer of truthful news.

Who does that?

The only question I have is are you doing that because you're blissfully
ignorant of everything surrounding the Apple ecosystem?

Or, maybe are you paid by Apple to deny every fact about Apple you hate?

Dunno.
All I know is you strange religious zealots appear to be incredibly
ignorant of all things around Apple products.

You can't even answer the simplest questions of how Apple updates work.

Who is that ignorant? Nobody is that stupid, right?
And yet, you are.

How can anyone be that blissfully ignorant of everything?
The bliss you enjoy from your ignorance must be as strong as opiates.

Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote on 4 Jul 2024 17:37:39 GMT :
>
>> Nobody in this news group denied the existence of CocoaPods
>
> The question is asking whether everyone is as blissfully ignorant of what
> Apple is as are you rather strange very loyal religious fundamentalists.
>
> Not only do you never know anything about Apple vulnerabilities, Jolly
> Roger, but you religious zealots immediately attack in crusader-like
> fashion, anyone who even so much as dares to publish Apple vulnerabilities.
>
> Who does that?
>
> The first thing you always do is brazenly every vulnerability.
>
> Then you frantically find a way to use whataboutism to blame everyone but
> Apple for Apple's huge and many vulnerabilities due to lack of testing.
>
> You blame Google for Apple's flaws. You blame Samsung. You blame Microsoft
> too. You blame anyone but Apple for the huge flaws in the entire ecosystem.
>
> Then, when you can no longer deflect the topic off the huge flaws in teh
> Apple ecosystem, you then vehemently attack any bearer of truthful news.
>
> Who does that?
>
> The only question I have is are you doing that because you're blissfully
> ignorant of everything surrounding the Apple ecosystem?
>
> Or, maybe are you paid by Apple to deny every fact about Apple you hate?
>
> Dunno.
> All I know is you strange religious zealots appear to be incredibly
> ignorant of all things around Apple products.
>
> You can't even answer the simplest questions of how Apple updates work.
>
> Who is that ignorant? Nobody is that stupid, right?
> And yet, you are.
>
> How can anyone be that blissfully ignorant of everything?
> The bliss you enjoy from your ignorance must be as strong as opiates.
>

Personally I think they are so invested in the perfection of Apple that
they cannot bear the thought of there being flaws in its products. If
someone exposes such flaws, it invalidates everything they stand for.

badgolferman wrote on Thu, 4 Jul 2024 20:57:23 -0000 (UTC) :

>> How can anyone be that blissfully ignorant of everything?
>> The bliss you enjoy from your ignorance must be as strong as opiates.
>>
>
> Personally I think they are so invested in the perfection of Apple that
> they cannot bear the thought of there being flaws in its products. If
> someone exposes such flaws, it invalidates everything they stand for.

You're logical and sensible, as am I, so I would have to agree with you.

I was trying to think of a situation where I'd be like they are, where, for
example, if you told me a truth about Google or Samsung or Android
(regarding my Galaxy phone), I'd agree with you. I wouldn't defend any of
them to the death as they all suck. I don't owe them samurai-like loyalty.

If you told me there was a bug affecting 3 million apps which had not been
noticed for a decade, I'd appreciate that information. If you told me that
my phone isn't updated as frequently as I thought it was, I'd thank you.

I don't want to live in blissful ignorance.
I want to live in knowledgeable awareness.

But these strange zealots appear to want to remain blissfully ignorant.

Even more to the point of the blissful ignorance, if you told me that any
of them didn't update my operating system the way most people think it
would have been updated... I'd be APPRECIATIVE that you informed me.

A normal person doesn't fight the person providing information that they
were unaware of prior, right? A normal person welcomes more data, right?

But these strange religious zealots literally ATTACK anyone providing data.
Apparently, saying facts about Apple ruins their blissful ignorance.

I wouldn't attack you for ruining my blissful ignorance, now would I?
I'd welcome you informing me of things about my phone that I didn't know.

Unlike a normal person, it seems like these religious zealots want to
remain in blissful ignorance - as it somehow placates them to not know.

On 2024-07-04 13:31, Jolly Roger wrote:

> Arlen and baldgolferman are projecting their own blind faith.

Which is why they should not be replied to.
They are trolls - and the sole remedy for trolls is to deprive them of
oxygen: replies.

--
"It would be a measureless disaster if Russian barbarism overlaid
the culture and independence of the ancient States of Europe."
Winston Churchill

On 2024-07-05, Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
> On 2024-07-04 13:31, Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> Arlen and baldgolferman are projecting their own blind faith.
>
> Which is why they should not be replied to. They are trolls - and the
> sole remedy for trolls is to deprive them of oxygen: replies.

Their constant nym switching guarantees that doesn't happen, meanwhile
they spew outright lies that otherwise would remain uncorrected.

--
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

Jolly Roger wrote on 5 Jul 2024 01:40:02 GMT :

> meanwhile
> they spew outright lies that otherwise would remain uncorrected.

As I study you rather strange religious zealots, what's conspicuous is how
desperately afraid you are are of the facts about Apple & its products.

You literally *fear* any and all facts about Apple products to the point
that the only thing you want is to remain blissfully ignorant of facts.

Why?

On 04/07/2024 21:04, Andrew wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote on 4 Jul 2024 17:37:39 GMT :
>
>> Nobody in this news group denied the existence of CocoaPods
>
> The question is asking whether everyone is as blissfully ignorant of what
> Apple is as are you rather strange very loyal religious fundamentalists.

What's no longer surprising is how people who like to bash Apple don't
even read the news they're using as evidence of Apple's failures.

Apple had no role and was not responsible for any aspect of this
vulnerability. As you'll note no iOS or macOS patch has been issued to
resolve this vulnerability.

You can check yourself what cocoapods is about and who manages it:
https://cocoapods.org/about
https://github.com/CocoaPods

You're doing the equivalent of blaming google for the recent xz
vulnerability which is clearly rubbish.
https://arstechnica.com/security/2024/04/what-we-know-about-the-xz-utils-backdoor-that-almost-infected-the-world/

Chris wrote on Fri, 5 Jul 2024 09:40:46 +0100 :

>>> Nobody in this news group denied the existence of CocoaPods
>>
>> The question is asking whether everyone is as blissfully ignorant of what
>> Apple is as are you rather strange very loyal religious fundamentalists.
>
> What's no longer surprising is how people who like to bash Apple don't
> even read the news they're using as evidence of Apple's failures.

You Apple nutcases always claim that I love Google & Microsoft.

Let me tell you something, Chris - which you should already know by now.

I tell the truth (with cites) about every consumer operating system, Chris.

> Apple had no role and was not responsible for any aspect of this
> vulnerability. As you'll note no iOS or macOS patch has been issued to
> resolve this vulnerability.
>
> You can check yourself what cocoapods is about and who manages it:
> https://cocoapods.org/about
> https://github.com/CocoaPods

Since the flaw is so fantastically pervasive, and since it allows
zero-click exploits on only Apple products, don't you think Apple should
have cared about testing this since it affects billions of users?

<https://thehackernews.com/2024/07/critical-flaws-in-cocoapods-expose-ios.html>

> You're doing the equivalent of blaming google for the recent xz
> vulnerability which is clearly rubbish.
> https://arstechnica.com/security/2024/04/what-we-know-about-the-xz-utils-backdoor-that-almost-infected-the-world/

Again, you need to reconsider your assertion that I love Google and
Microsoft but that I only bash Apple, Chris. I tell the facts.

If you happen to hate the facts about Apple, that's not my fault.

On 2024-07-04 21:40, Jolly Roger wrote:
> On 2024-07-05, Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
>> On 2024-07-04 13:31, Jolly Roger wrote:
>>
>>> Arlen and baldgolferman are projecting their own blind faith.
>>
>> Which is why they should not be replied to. They are trolls - and the
>> sole remedy for trolls is to deprive them of oxygen: replies.
>
> Their constant nym switching guarantees that doesn't happen, meanwhile
> they spew outright lies that otherwise would remain uncorrected.

They're pretty detectable and the lies are blatant - don't need
correction. Usenet is far from the destination people go to for
clarification about anything.

--
"It would be a measureless disaster if Russian barbarism overlaid
the culture and independence of the ancient States of Europe."
Winston Churchill

badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
> Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:

[snip typical nonsense]

>
> Personally I think they are so invested in the perfection of Apple that
> they cannot bear the thought of there being flaws in its products. If
> someone exposes such flaws, it invalidates everything they stand for.

The other side of the coin is that some people are so eager to find flaws
in Apple they forget to check basic facts. Like is this even anything
within Apple's control? Hint: nope.

Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
> badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
>
> [snip typical nonsense]
>
>>
>> Personally I think they are so invested in the perfection of Apple that
>> they cannot bear the thought of there being flaws in its products. If
>> someone exposes such flaws, it invalidates everything they stand for.
>
> The other side of the coin is that some people are so eager to find flaws
> in Apple they forget to check basic facts. Like is this even anything
> within Apple's control? Hint: nope.
>
>

If Apple software is dependent upon someone else’s software, it’s Apple’s
responsibility to ensure that software is safe. After all, it’s Apple who
tells us they are focused on safety and security.

On 2024-07-05 11:43, badgolferman wrote:
> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>> badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
>>
>> [snip typical nonsense]
>>
>>>
>>> Personally I think they are so invested in the perfection of Apple that
>>> they cannot bear the thought of there being flaws in its products. If
>>> someone exposes such flaws, it invalidates everything they stand for.
>>
>> The other side of the coin is that some people are so eager to find flaws
>> in Apple they forget to check basic facts. Like is this even anything
>> within Apple's control? Hint: nope.
>>
>>
>
> If Apple software is dependent upon someone else’s software, it’s Apple’s
> responsibility to ensure that software is safe. After all, it’s Apple who
> tells us they are focused on safety and security.
>

Which you'll argue while at the same time arguing that Apple is wrong to
do what it can to increase safety and security by using an app store.

Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> On 2024-07-05 11:43, badgolferman wrote:
>> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> [snip typical nonsense]
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Personally I think they are so invested in the perfection of Apple that
>>>> they cannot bear the thought of there being flaws in its products. If
>>>> someone exposes such flaws, it invalidates everything they stand for.
>>>
>>> The other side of the coin is that some people are so eager to find flaws
>>> in Apple they forget to check basic facts. Like is this even anything
>>> within Apple's control? Hint: nope.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> If Apple software is dependent upon someone else’s software, it’s Apple’s
>> responsibility to ensure that software is safe. After all, it’s Apple who
>> tells us they are focused on safety and security.
>>
>
> Which you'll argue while at the same time arguing that Apple is wrong to
> do what it can to increase safety and security by using an app store.
>

I have no problem with the App Store. But I do think the option to use
other stores should exist, with all warnings and check marks required for
you to advance. Apple shouldn’t be responsible for software they have not
vetted and if the customer still wants it then they are culpable if
something goes wrong.

But this is a different situation. Apple used someone else’s software and
didn’t correctly vet that. It perpetuated itself deeper and has caused
security problems now. That’s on Apple.

On 2024-07-05 13:02, badgolferman wrote:
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>> On 2024-07-05 11:43, badgolferman wrote:
>>> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [snip typical nonsense]
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Personally I think they are so invested in the perfection of Apple that
>>>>> they cannot bear the thought of there being flaws in its products. If
>>>>> someone exposes such flaws, it invalidates everything they stand for.
>>>>
>>>> The other side of the coin is that some people are so eager to find flaws
>>>> in Apple they forget to check basic facts. Like is this even anything
>>>> within Apple's control? Hint: nope.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> If Apple software is dependent upon someone else’s software, it’s Apple’s
>>> responsibility to ensure that software is safe. After all, it’s Apple who
>>> tells us they are focused on safety and security.
>>>
>>
>> Which you'll argue while at the same time arguing that Apple is wrong to
>> do what it can to increase safety and security by using an app store.
>>
>
> I have no problem with the App Store. But I do think the option to use
> other stores should exist, with all warnings and check marks required for
> you to advance. Apple shouldn’t be responsible for software they have not
> vetted and if the customer still wants it then they are culpable if
> something goes wrong.

So now you say that Apple shouldn't be responsible.

Make up your mind, huh?

>
> But this is a different situation. Apple used someone else’s software and
> didn’t correctly vet that. It perpetuated itself deeper and has caused
> security problems now. That’s on Apple.
>

CocoaPods is a dependency manager; a software tool you use to create
software. It manages the dependencies you're using. It isn't software
that itself winds up IN your software.

So how could Apple reasonably check if some third-party software was
built using it?

Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
> On 2024-07-05 13:02, badgolferman wrote:
>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>> On 2024-07-05 11:43, badgolferman wrote:
>>>> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> [snip typical nonsense]
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Personally I think they are so invested in the perfection of Apple that
>>>>>> they cannot bear the thought of there being flaws in its products. If
>>>>>> someone exposes such flaws, it invalidates everything they stand for.
>>>>>
>>>>> The other side of the coin is that some people are so eager to find flaws
>>>>> in Apple they forget to check basic facts. Like is this even anything
>>>>> within Apple's control? Hint: nope.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If Apple software is dependent upon someone else’s software, it’s Apple’s
>>>> responsibility to ensure that software is safe. After all, it’s Apple who
>>>> tells us they are focused on safety and security.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Which you'll argue while at the same time arguing that Apple is wrong to
>>> do what it can to increase safety and security by using an app store.
>>>
>>
>> I have no problem with the App Store. But I do think the option to use
>> other stores should exist, with all warnings and check marks required for
>> you to advance. Apple shouldn’t be responsible for software they have not
>> vetted and if the customer still wants it then they are culpable if
>> something goes wrong.
>
> So now you say that Apple shouldn't be responsible.
>
> Make up your mind, huh?
>
>>
>> But this is a different situation. Apple used someone else’s software and
>> didn’t correctly vet that. It perpetuated itself deeper and has caused
>> security problems now. That’s on Apple.
>>
>
> CocoaPods is a dependency manager; a software tool you use to create
> software. It manages the dependencies you're using. It isn't software
> that itself winds up IN your software.
>
> So how could Apple reasonably check if some third-party software was
> built using it?
>

Maybe I misunderstood, but I thought this problem also affected the Apple
software engineers.

In any case, I’m sure it’s virtually impossible to keep track of everything
but a company that touts its safety and security presence must do more.
Look at LastPass, they’ve become a joke.

On 2024-07-05 13:34, badgolferman wrote:
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>> On 2024-07-05 13:02, badgolferman wrote:
>>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2024-07-05 11:43, badgolferman wrote:
>>>>> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [snip typical nonsense]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Personally I think they are so invested in the perfection of Apple that
>>>>>>> they cannot bear the thought of there being flaws in its products. If
>>>>>>> someone exposes such flaws, it invalidates everything they stand for.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The other side of the coin is that some people are so eager to find flaws
>>>>>> in Apple they forget to check basic facts. Like is this even anything
>>>>>> within Apple's control? Hint: nope.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If Apple software is dependent upon someone else’s software, it’s Apple’s
>>>>> responsibility to ensure that software is safe. After all, it’s Apple who
>>>>> tells us they are focused on safety and security.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Which you'll argue while at the same time arguing that Apple is wrong to
>>>> do what it can to increase safety and security by using an app store.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I have no problem with the App Store. But I do think the option to use
>>> other stores should exist, with all warnings and check marks required for
>>> you to advance. Apple shouldn’t be responsible for software they have not
>>> vetted and if the customer still wants it then they are culpable if
>>> something goes wrong.
>>
>> So now you say that Apple shouldn't be responsible.
>>
>> Make up your mind, huh?
>>
>>>
>>> But this is a different situation. Apple used someone else’s software and
>>> didn’t correctly vet that. It perpetuated itself deeper and has caused
>>> security problems now. That’s on Apple.
>>>
>>
>> CocoaPods is a dependency manager; a software tool you use to create
>> software. It manages the dependencies you're using. It isn't software
>> that itself winds up IN your software.
>>
>> So how could Apple reasonably check if some third-party software was
>> built using it?
>>
>
> Maybe I misunderstood, but I thought this problem also affected the Apple
> software engineers.

Where did you read that?

>
> In any case, I’m sure it’s virtually impossible to keep track of everything
> but a company that touts its safety and security presence must do more.
> Look at LastPass, they’ve become a joke.

Again:

What CocoaPods is is a tool used during software development for
managing the libraries that a software developer uses, and after the
software is deployed, the developer continues to use it to track updates
to those libraries...

....but all of that takes place in a manner that is completely opaque to
Apple.

There is no practical way for Apple to detect the fact that the
developers of CocoaPods screwed up and created a system that let bad
actors claim ownership of the "Pods" (external libraries) that CocoaPods
tracks and insert malicious code in them.

Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
> Chris wrote on Fri, 5 Jul 2024 09:40:46 +0100 :
>
>>>> Nobody in this news group denied the existence of CocoaPods
>>>
>>> The question is asking whether everyone is as blissfully ignorant of what
>>> Apple is as are you rather strange very loyal religious fundamentalists.
>>
>> What's no longer surprising is how people who like to bash Apple don't
>> even read the news they're using as evidence of Apple's failures.
>
> You Apple nutcases always claim that I love Google & Microsoft.

You're fantasising again. No-one has said that.

> Let me tell you something, Chris - which you should already know by now.
>
> I tell the truth (with cites) about every consumer operating system, Chris.

You have no concept of the truth or facts. And when you get caught out, you
snip and run.

>> Apple had no role and was not responsible for any aspect of this
>> vulnerability. As you'll note no iOS or macOS patch has been issued to
>> resolve this vulnerability.
>>
>> You can check yourself what cocoapods is about and who manages it:
>> https://cocoapods.org/about
>> https://github.com/CocoaPods
>
> Since the flaw is so fantastically pervasive, and since it allows
> zero-click exploits on only Apple products, don't you think Apple should
> have cared about testing this since it affects billions of users?

What libraries developers use is their responsibility, not Apple's. It's
the same with all OSes.

If Apple became even more prescriptive regarding how apps should be
developed you'd be the first to claim foul play and complain even more
about the "walled garden".

badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>> On 2024-07-05 11:43, badgolferman wrote:
>>> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [snip typical nonsense]
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Personally I think they are so invested in the perfection of Apple that
>>>>> they cannot bear the thought of there being flaws in its products. If
>>>>> someone exposes such flaws, it invalidates everything they stand for.
>>>>
>>>> The other side of the coin is that some people are so eager to find flaws
>>>> in Apple they forget to check basic facts. Like is this even anything
>>>> within Apple's control? Hint: nope.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> If Apple software is dependent upon someone else’s software, it’s Apple’s
>>> responsibility to ensure that software is safe. After all, it’s Apple who
>>> tells us they are focused on safety and security.
>>>
>>
>> Which you'll argue while at the same time arguing that Apple is wrong to
>> do what it can to increase safety and security by using an app store.
>>
>
> I have no problem with the App Store. But I do think the option to use
> other stores should exist, with all warnings and check marks required for
> you to advance. Apple shouldn’t be responsible for software they have not
> vetted and if the customer still wants it then they are culpable if
> something goes wrong.
>
> But this is a different situation. Apple used someone else’s software and
> didn’t correctly vet that.

See? You don't even understand the vulnerability. Yet you're happy to
freely blame Apple.

Apple haven't used anything here. It is third party developers who used a
utility that made life easier for them to support *their* apps. These apps
then are deployed into the Apple ecosystem.

Apple haven't used it, cannot check and have no responsibility for what
tools developers use in creating their apps.

> It perpetuated itself deeper and has caused
> security problems now. That’s on Apple.

That's like blaming Ford for a flaw in Continental tyres.

Chris wrote on Sat, 6 Jul 2024 07:39:51 -0000 (UTC) :

> See?

What I see is Apple touts safety & security that doesn't exist.

> You don't even understand the vulnerability.

What you're saying, Chris, is that Apple lied because you're saying that
Apple has no control over the safety and security of the apps people use.

> Yet you're happy to freely blame Apple.

Answer this question without resorting to lies, please, Chris:
Q: Does Apple tout the safety & security of iOS and macOS or not?
A: Yes or No

> Apple haven't used anything here.

Xcode is Apple software, Chris.

> It is third party developers who used a
> utility that made life easier for them to support *their* apps.

They used Apple's recommended methods of development, Chris.

> These apps then are deployed into the Apple ecosystem.

Answer this simple yet logically sensible question please:
Q: Did vulnerability researchers find this pervasive flaw, or not?
A: Yes or No

> Apple haven't used it, cannot check and have no responsibility for what
> tools developers use in creating their apps.

Simply answer this sensibly logical question then, please, Chris:
Q: If researchers could find this flaw, could Apple have found it?
A: Yes or No

>> It perpetuated itself deeper and has caused
>> security problems now. That�s on Apple.
>
> That's like blaming Ford for a flaw in Continental tyres.

Apple advertises safety & security.

Zealots are claiming that safety & security is impossible on Apple products
because of the way millions of those Apple products are developed using
Apple software (Xcode).

What's no longer shocking is those who say in one breath that Apple
provides safety and security and yet, in the next breath these Apple
religious zealots claim safety & security is beyond Apple's control