Quote from: ArticMine on April 13, 2016, 12:05:39 AM

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on April 12, 2016, 11:44:38 PM

...

Please explain how TouchID with a secure password is dependent on DRM?

Apple can't force people to adopt strong security if they have no desire to. Those who have a desire to, will use a secure password and TouchID (or not use Apple device).

I don't see the citations that show me that Apple has forced everyone to accept DRM for their security?

Apple has not forced everyone to accept DRM as their security in the FBI case since a user could use a secure password and not use TouchID. What Apple has done:

1) Discourage the use of strong security by using a numeric password as the default.
2) Give the user a false sense of security by relying on DRM as for security
3) Making the situation far worse by misleading the public during the Apple / FBI case rather than come clean on their security weaknesses

TouchID relies on DRM because it relies on Apple's proprietary software and software installation lock to match the fingerprints. If one changes the software then one may be able to defeat this. This is what the FBI did. Apart for the fact that getting someone's fingerprints is really not that difficult especially if one considers a government adversary. I mean in the FBI case the FBI had access to both the terrorist's fingerprints and the terrorist's corpse.

By the way Apple is not alone here. There is a lot of security theater being pushed on unsuspecting consumers. Furthermore when the security flaws are exposed companies resort in many cases to litigation rather than address the security problems they have created. This is a perfect example involving major vehicle manufacturers. http://blog.caranddriver.com/hackers-crack-key-fob-encryption-used-by-more-than-25-automakers/

Basically if the "security" is proprietary it simply cannot be trusted.

Edit: The bold point is critical to understanding the security of a crypto currency. If the security is proprietary or dependent upon proprietary software then it should not be trusted.

Not to violate smooth et al's (and my prior acknowledgement) request to stop this line of discussion because it is mostly off topic here, I just want to cap off by saying I agree with ArticMine on every thing, except the reality that consumers won't buy such an honest marketed device that he advocates because as smooth agreed, typing a long password is a PITA and a separate hardware key on a key chain is also considered a PITA (something else to lose) by the masses.

If you are part of the 0.001% who want strong security, that option is available to you on the Apple devices. I don't think it is fair for us to tell Apple how to market their devices such that they can maximize sales. Criticize the masses or better yet accept reality.

I understand the relevance here to Monero is:

1. That Apple bans crypto-currency (CC) wallets. And is able to enforce the ban with DRM unless your jailbreak your device (which voids the warranty).

2. Perhaps Monero folks think that if Apple teaches the masses to be security conscious then more of them will be attuned to the benefits of private CC such as Monero.

3. General aversion to closed source.

My relevant comment to this thread, is this exempifies why Monero can't create JAMBOX. They don't understand marketing.