Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Apple IT

Apple To Add RCS Support To iPhone Next Year (9to5mac.com) 160

Posted by msmash from the change-of-heart dept.
9to5Mac: In a surprising move, Apple has announced today that it will adopt the RCS (Rich Communication Services) messaging standard. The feature will launch via a software update "later next year" and bring a wide range of iMessage-style features to messaging between iPhone and Android users. Apple's decision comes amid pressure from regulators and competitors like Google and Samsung. It also comes as RCS has continued to develop and become a more mature platform than it once was.

In a statement to 9to5Mac, an Apple spokesperson said that the company believes RCS will offer better interoperability for cross-platform messages. "Later next year, we will be adding support for RCS Universal Profile, the standard as currently published by the GSM Association. We believe RCS Universal Profile will offer a better interoperability experience when compared to SMS or MMS. This will work alongside iMessage, which will continue to be the best and most secure messaging experience for Apple users."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple To Add RCS Support To iPhone Next Year More

Apple To Add RCS Support To iPhone Next Year

Comments Filter:

  • Counterpoint.. (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 16, 2023 @01:25PM (#64010147)

    Apple has decided to FIX the buggy RCS standard.

    • Re: Counterpoint.. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by ArmoredDragon ( 3450605 ) on Thursday November 16, 2023 @01:34PM (#64010175)

      Actually it's the other way around if they implement it to Google's standards for e2ee. iMessage has many well known security flaws to the point that iMessage is only as private as Apple wants it to be in that their protocol basically enables them to MitM your chats without your knowledge.

      Goggles RCS implementation uses the signal protocol, which has no such weakness. And based on Apple's comments, they won't be implementing that. Their comments are particularly interesting here:

      This will work alongside iMessage, which will continue to be the best and most secure messaging experience for Apple users

      In other words, Apple has a pretty low opinion of how much security their users should have.

      • iMessage has many well known security flaws to the point that iMessage is only as private as Apple wants it to be in that their protocol basically enables them to MitM your chats without your knowledge.

        *Citation needed.

        • Re: (Score:3)

          by narcc ( 412956 )

          You can't use a search engine?

          Some well-known security flaws: here's one [forbes.com] here's another [wired.com].

          The thing about Apple being able to read iMessage messages: link [forbes.com]

          • You posted links reporting that Apple has fixed security flaws as proof that Apple has multiple unpatched security flaws? How does that work, exactly?
          • Fuck, you never cease to impress me with how fucking dim-witted you are.

            The context here was security vulnerabilities in the protocol and e2ee of iMessage.

            What do you give us? An example of the risks of the application parsing the message having flaws (signal/Google RCS e2ee aren't somwhow magically invulnerable to this), and a setting which provides an unencrypted backup of your phone to Apple, which. has fucking nothing to do with iMessage's e2ee.

            Fuck man, back in the kitchen. Someone's burger is ge

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by narcc ( 412956 )

              Sigh... I see you're still having trouble reading. Do you really need me to explain simple things to you again? I'll give you hint this time, but try to remember that your illiteracy is not my responsibility.

              Go read the thread again. Slow down and pay very close attention. Find an adult to help you with the 'big' words.

              The hint I promised:

              iMessage has many well known security flaws to the point that iMessage is only as private as Apple wants it to be in that their protocol basically enables them to MitM your chats without your knowledge.

              There are two claims being here. See if you can figure out what they are. Now, on the second claim, what do you think he was referring to? Remember that he's about

        • Tldr summary, by default your iPhone backsup your private keys and messages to iCloud, FBI can easily apply for a warrant then read you private msgs.

          • Citation please. My understanding of iPhone security is that keys are kept on the phone in the Secure Enclave. Encrypted messages are kept in iCloud. That is unless the user decides to not encrypt anything.

            • Giving apple your keys is still opt-out. Sure, iMessage is technically e2ee in-flight, but not at-rest on Apple's servers. Even if you opt-out, everybody you talk to effectively has to as well for it to be of any use. And yes, Apple does provide the means to figure out who that might be.

              • It is encrypted at-rest on Apple's servers.
                The iCloud backup problem is the only exception.
                That's a problem on any device that does full backups.

                I'll happily grant you that this should be made clear via opt-in and warning.
              • Again. Citation please.

        • Tldr summary, by default your iPhone backsup your private keys to iCloud, FBI can easily apply for a warrant

      • Re: Counterpoint.. (Score:5, Insightful)

        by DarkOx ( 621550 ) on Thursday November 16, 2023 @01:45PM (#64010207) Journal

        LOL - you're worried about Apple exploiting weaknesses in their protocol while using requires exclusively closed source Apple software. They don't need to make the protocol defective, they can just backdoor the app on your phone or Mac - if they were so inclined

        The same applies to Alphabet, even though it is OSS, 90% of users are running binaries they just their vendors did nothing to compromise, and if Google itself wanted to leak stuff into their telemetry i doubt the messaging app gets enough eyes on it that it would be noticed for years, assuming they made any real effort to conceal it and appear accidental.

        • Well there's always this:

          https://github.com/signalapp [github.com]

          I don't know about you, but all of the components I need are written in rust and java, two languages I'm quite fluent in, and they use libraries that I'm also already familiar with, especially rustcrypto and boringssl, both of which I've used in many projects and -- oh...silly me. This is all moot. Almost forgot...You're an iDerp. Even if you could understand everything there or at least figure out how to build it, it's not as if Tim Cock would allow you

          • Just don't do a full backup of Signal's locally stored keys., which are literally fucking plaintext.
            Come on, dude.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by _xeno_ ( 155264 )

        It always amazes me how many people uncritically accept Apple's "privacy" advertising when it falls apart the instant you look at it.

        Do people forget "the Fappening" when people were able to just access celebrity iCloud photo albums because Apple didn't properly secure them? The recent news that Apple's "MAC address randomization," designed to "protect against tracking," didn't bother with the "randomization" part?

        Apple has made it quite clear, if you bother to listen: they don't care about your privacy. In

      • A big flaw in iMessage is that it, by default, reverts to SMS if the recipient's phone is turned off. Yes, there's a way to change that .. but most people keep defaults on.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by bn-7bc ( 909819 )
        As long as the rcs messages will avalable on both my apple devices at once ( like both iMessage and SMS is now) I'm all for e2ee, if not I'll forgo e2ee, if I have messages thstvare so secret rhat they need e2ee I'll use smime/pgp for that edge case

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by HiThere ( 15173 )

      Just this morning I was thinking about Pascal and Objective C, and said to myself "Apple is where computer languages go to die".

      Well, that *probably* isn't fair. Objective-C was spinning slowly before Apple ever touched it. But not all the documentation is for abandoned dialects.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by HBI ( 10338492 )

        Objective C concepts got liberally borrowed from for LPC, the mud language. Also mostly dead now. Other than that...yeah, dead.

        Pascal has had several flowerings associated with Turbo Pascal and its descendants. Apple is not the only place it existed or exists.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by HiThere ( 15173 )

          It pretty much killed off Delphi. FreePascal still exists, but so does objc ... both are, umm, on life-support. Objc was a bit healthier (the last time I checked), but the documentation all kept referring to Apple only extensions...which have been dropped. I don't even have NSObject installed anymore.

  • Wow. (Score:3)

    by The Faywood Assassin ( 542375 ) <benyjr@@@yahoo...ca> on Thursday November 16, 2023 @01:26PM (#64010151) Homepage

    You did it. You crazy son of a bitch you did it.

    • Re:Wow. (Score:5, Informative)

      by UnknowingFool ( 672806 ) on Thursday November 16, 2023 @01:54PM (#64010237)
      Not really. Apple is supporting RCS Universal Profile not Google RCS. That distinction Google does not mention in their campaign against Apple. RCS Universal Profile is a standard. Google RCS is not. The key things missing from RCS Universal Profile so far are reactions and encryption. Reactions are meh but people care about E2EE. I surmise the main reason Apple has not implemented RCS is that it has very inconsistent implementation because carriers and manufacturers can pick and choose features they want to adopt. Any two Android phones may not share the same feature sets of RCS much less between an Android and an iPhone.

      • Indeed. The answer is obviously that we just need another RCS standard. Then we'll have $numStandards++;

        • For me RCS is Revision Control System, which was killed by CVS, which in turn is taken down by Git.

        • Or a newer version of RCS could remove the inconsistencies. RCS itself is very old. The feature set has not developed as fast as some of the key industry players would like. Getting agreement from everyone is always going to be an issue.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by guruevi ( 827432 )

        RCS is not a standard, it's yet another useless proprietary implementation. Sure you'll now be able to talk to Androids with slightly better results when they send you a video or picture but it's derived from MMS which is derived from SMS and offers zero security except for what someone like Google or Apple bolts on top.

        As far as interoperability, you can't build an open source RCS server as the GSMA won't license them out to anyone.

      • Re:Wow. (Score:4, Informative)

        by ceoyoyo ( 59147 ) on Thursday November 16, 2023 @03:04PM (#64010417)

        Lol. Yes, Apple decided to do exactly what Google demanded: implement RCS. They notably did not implement Google's proprietary "RCS", and I bet they're going to connect you to your carrier's RCS system, not Google's.

        Regulators: Apple, you must adhere to standards and implement RCS!

        Apple: We did.

        Regulators: Google, WTF?

        Google: But they implemented standard RCS! Yeah that's what the commercials said, but that's not what we meant!

        Carriers: goody, money!

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          Google doesn't have an RCS system. That's not how it works.

          E2EE is negotiated over the standard RCS protocol, i.e. it works transparently on carrier RCS systems and does not require any special support from the server.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by short ( 66530 )
        Encryption is pointless when the program (Google Chat) is proprietary. I do not know what are "reactions" but as that should be user visible it matters.

        • Encryption is pointless when the program (Google Chat) is proprietary. I do not know what are "reactions" but as that should be user visible it matters.

          RCS is not Google Chat. There is no relationship between the two. Reactions are the way you can respond to another person's message with an emoji, not as a separate message, but in a way that the emoji is displayed attached to their message.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by short ( 66530 )

            RCS is not Google Chat. There is no relationship between the two.

            Ah true, Google Chat is XMPP. But Google Messages is RCS. But it is true both Chat and Messages are not proprietary in AOSP. OTOH I do not think the few AOSP users matter here. In Google Android both apps are proprietary.

      • Reactions are meh but people care about E2EE.

        I care about E2EE, and you care about E2EE, but I'd bet if you polled users there are far more that care about reactions.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        If Apple doesn't implement E2EE then they will have to show that communications with non-Apple users are insecure in some way. Maybe the infamous green bubble. But that would make doing this for anti-trust reasons kinda pointless, since the main thing people focus on is that green bubble.

        If they want to avoid being regulated, they will need to add E2EE support and get rid of the green bubbles.

        • If Apple doesn't implement E2EE then they will have to show that communications with non-Apple users are insecure in some way. Maybe the infamous green bubble. But that would make doing this for anti-trust reasons kinda pointless, since the main thing people focus on is that green bubble.

          That would be the whole point. Google is complaining heavily that Apple is not "following a standard" if they do not implement RCS. Google however is not being entirely honest in their argument. They mean to say Apple is not adopting their non-standard implementation of RCS. I guess to shut them up, Apple will implement standard RCS to show there is very little to be gained when it comes to security. RCS Universal Profile is basically SMS++. Also, if the EU complains about Apple, what is the complaint? That

  • It sounds like this will be integrated into imessage. If so, I hope thereâ(TM)s either a way to disable ads or disable support for the protocol.

    • I hope thereâ(TM)s either a way to disable ads or disable support for the protocol.

      All of the spam texts I receive come through as SMS. If a spammer has your number and wants to spam you, this changes absolutely nothing.

      Also, on the subject of settings to disable on your phone, you might want to look into turning smart punctuation off.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

        All of the spam texts I receive come through as SMS. If a spammer has your number and wants to spam you, this changes absolutely nothing.

        RCS ads are something different. They can be triggered by where you are, for example. So you're texting someone than walk by a restaurant. The restaurant could pop up an ad in the middle of your conversation for that restaurant.

        No phone number needed - it can be pushed to people in a geographic region or otherwise.

        It's not SMS people who text you, it's ads just popping up

        • Considering that iOS added an option to block all unknown callers, I'd assume Apple wouldn't let such an obnoxious form of advertising fly in one of their default applications. We'll obviously have to wait and see, but my money's on Apple blocking the spam.

        • Easy solution. Go to the restaurant and throw a brick through the window.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by bn-7bc ( 909819 )
            Or, assuming neither you nor the person you where texting at the time hav evere been a customer of that restaurant before, just includ the unsolicited message ( ie spam) and a few years woerh of bank and cc statments firm bith parties of a the messaging conversation in a spam complaint, that shuld stop such cenanigance, what you have incomp,ete statmends because you use cash as often as possible to no be tracked and ofc its impossible to prove the non exsistance of receipts are caused by not using the ast

      • Except that you can disable text messaging at the carrier level (which is what I do). No text messages at all, only iMessages.

    • I wonder if RCS support can be turned off? RCS is going to be the s**t show like HTML formatted email messages.

  • Not only is this great news for interoperability, but it's gonna really piss off all the people from the previous story who were defending lowest-common-denominator SMS as "good enough" because "it even works on flip phones*", as if there really were anyone still grinding out messages in T9.

    * Referring specifically to the old school dumbphones which are probably not even a thing anymore due to modern US cell networks requiring a phone that has VoLTE support.

    • If you are looking at interoperability, RCS is not it right now. Between any two Android phones, RCS implementation is not guaranteed to work right. SMS being dumb will work pretty much all the time.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by bn-7bc ( 909819 )
      The VoLTE requirement it comming to Europe as well, as wecare allso shuting down oure old scool GSM ( 1g and 2g ) nerworks, to make nore soace for 4g and 5g. Shutting domn in this context means repurposing the frequency bands traditionally used for the older services with new equipment and ofc replacing evrithing above layer 1 ( osi)
  • Thatâ(TM)s the billion-dollar question.

  • It sounds to me like they plan to add support for it ALONGSIDE IMessage and SMS - which may indicate a third bubble color being created.

  • Will RCS messages be shown as blue or green or some new color (aqua as being between blue and green)?

  • But Apple is yet again refusing to implement the standards that make RCS functional as a messaging platform, and implementing only the very base features. So it'll "support RCS" but you still won't be able to do any of the useful things you can do between Android phones when messaging an iPhone from Android.

    Apple routines does the opposite of "embrace, extend, extinguish" where they "embrace" a standard, implement only the very bare minimums, point to that as a reason why you shouldn't use the standard, and

    • Re:But only the "universal profile" (Score:5, Insightful)

      by UnknowingFool ( 672806 ) on Thursday November 16, 2023 @02:02PM (#64010269)

      But Apple is yet again refusing to implement the standards that make RCS functional as a messaging platform, and implementing only the very base features.

      And what standard is that? If you mean Google's version of RCS, that is not the standard. RCS Universal Profile is the standard. That's like saying a writing app is not following the standard if it adopts OpenDocument format (ODF ISO 26300) but not Microsoft's Word because Word has more features.

      Apple routines does the opposite of "embrace, extend, extinguish" where they "embrace" a standard, implement only the very bare minimums, point to that as a reason why you shouldn't use the standard, and then points everyone to their own walled garden as the solution to the problems they created in the first place.

      You just said Apple is following a standard. They are not extending it. They are following the standard. They are not following the standard you want them to follow but they are following a standard.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by _xeno_ ( 155264 )

        That's like saying a writing app is not following the standard if it adopts OpenDocument format (ODF ISO 26300) but not Microsoft's Word because Word has more features.

        That's an interesting comparison considering that Microsoft Word's format is also an open standard at this point [officeopenxml.com]. If what you want to do is interoperate with people using Microsoft Word, and you do it by implementing a standard Microsoft Word doesn't use instead of the one it does, you're not really interoperating, are you?

        There are a bunch of additional standards - fully open, published standards - on top of the base RCS standard required to make it a useful messaging platform. Apple isn't implementing the

        • No. Open Office XML is not Word. OOXML was MS trying to mess with standards. How do you know? Try to open a Word document with anything that works with OOXML. Does not work well. Also open OOXML document with Word. Also does not work well.

          There are a bunch of additional standards - fully open, published standards - on top of the base RCS standard required to make it a useful messaging platform.

          Please cite the fully open published standard that adds E2EE into RCS. It should be sufficiently specific as to what algorithms are allowed and how to use them.

          Apple isn't implementing them. Just the bare minimum required to be "compatible."

          So Apple is following the bare minimum but according to you they are also not following the standard. At best App

    • This word "standard" does not mean what you seem to,think it means.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

      Apple is implementing the standard. They are not implementing Google's proprietary extensions. Yes, RCS is kind of crap, but that's what Google demanded because "hey, Apple, implement proprietary Google chat protocol #17 plz" doesn't play as well in a commercial.

      • Apple is implementing the standard. They are not implementing Google's proprietary extensions. Yes, RCS is kind of crap, but that's what Google demanded because "hey, Apple, implement proprietary Google chat protocol #17 plz" doesn't play as well in a commercial.

        Nah, it's fine. The next iteration of the RCS Universal Profile will include E2EE and reactions, and Apple will eventually have to comply. It may take a few years, but this is a good start.

    • "any of the useful things you can do between Android phones "

      How many useful things can you name that are a) possible between Android phones right now, b) part of RCS but not part of RCS Universal Profile, and c) not proprietary extensions?

  • What color ? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Pascal Sartoretti ( 454385 ) on Thursday November 16, 2023 @03:32PM (#64010473)
    The "Messages" application displays SMS messages in green, iMessage in blue, should we expect brown for RCS ?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by MobyDisk ( 75490 )

      Can someone explain why do they do that? I cannot imagine a message board displaying comments in a different color based on what network protocol was used to post the comment.

      • iMessage has additional features which SMS/RCS lacks. So the blue bubbles are to signal to the user that those features (Such as sending money person-to-person via ApplePay.) are available in that conversation. I would also point out that contrary to Google's narrative Apple did not, in fact, create the green bubbles for the purpose of bullying or stigmatizing Android users. When the iPhone launched, a number of years prior to iMessage, *ALL* text bubbles were green, iPhone, Android, or old-school dumb p

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by MobyDisk ( 75490 )

          Ahh, that makes sense. Thanks!

        • Any allegations beyond that are purely the invention of Google.

          Actually, they were the invention of iPhone users. Apple didn't use blue bubbles to create the stigma, but it was created nevertheless, and Google obviously couldn't (and wouldn't) have done it.

      • Can someone explain why do they do that? I cannot imagine a message board displaying comments in a different color based on what network protocol was used to post the comment.

        It's not about the protocol, it's about which features the user can expect, the most important of which is end-to-end encryption.

        Blue = iMessage = end-to-end encrypted (E2EE, including group messages), multiple devices per user, delivery receipts, (optional) read receipts, typing response indicators, tapbacks, message effects, stickers, app integrations (e.g. Venmo, Apple Pay, etc.), support for editing and recalling messages, and more

        Green = SMS/MMS = unencrypted messaging with none of the above

        RCS support

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by MobyDisk ( 75490 )

          Thanks. Okay, so Google added extensions to an open standard, and Apple made their own protocol instead. I can definitely see that one of these approaches is much more open than the other. But LOL, I had no idea it was "uncool" to be one color or the other. The whole E2EE thing is new to me -- I just assume anything I do on my phone is 100% known to Apple, Google, my phone carrier, the other person's phone carrier, and every government agency on earth. I wouldn't trust E2EE offered by any of the aforem

          • The "cool" factor for consumers is that iMessage being blue had additional features like text notifications, read receipts, encryption, and now reactions when it was first introduced. If it was green it was SMS and does not have those features. From a basic association green messages meant you could not do as much therefore not as cool. Android messages fell under that because while they added features later to RCS, those features are not yet part of a standard so iPhones treat them still as SMS.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by dryeo ( 100693 )

              The question is, who the fuck would want most of that? When Google pushed RCS, first thing I did was turn off everything except the encryption. Who wants to advertise that you received a message? A reply works, and if you want to react, reply with a smiley or whatever.
              Text notifications? I get notified if I get a text as it is.
              I understand it is popular with the kids, but aren't most of us grown up now?

  • Next up, CVS, then Subversion and finally git.

  • Apple probably sees the writing on the wall and is hoping to preempt the need for regulation by implementing RCS. My prediction is that their RCS integration will be a half-assed solution that doesn't run nearly as well as it does among Android users. I fully expect iMessage users to have a superior experience messaging among themselves than messages between iMessage and Android users. Apple will likely blame the degraded experience on flaws or oversights in RCS. The question is whether or not iMessage

    • My prediction is that their RCS integration will be a half-assed solution that doesn't run nearly as well as it does among Android users

      No need to predict; that what it is already like for Android users. Look on forums and there are many questions why one Android user texting another Android user does not have [feature]? The answer almost always is that feature is optional in RCS Universal Profile thus it is up to manufacturers and carriers to all agree to implement it.

  • Oh, come on RCS was old in the 90s, surely they should at least support CVS. Or more realistically, SVN or git.

  • Apple have also announced that RCS messages will no longer appear in green bubbles, as this is reserved for SMS. Instead, RCS messages will be brown bubbles. /s

Slashdot Top Deals

Never test for an error condition you don't know how to handle. -- Steinbach

Close