So, essentially, it’s just a shitty company-operated clone of BlueBubbles now? What does Beeper offer now that a BlueBubbles solution doesn’t?
For example, it’s possible to self host and proxy BlueBubbles through an Nginx server on a VPS, which, when combined with connectivity to a Mac through local network/VPN handwavium, and proper security/authentication, allows you to securely access your iMessages on a public Internet domain through a web browser. Why should I trust some company’s band-aided implementation of that over rolling my own community-backed solution, especially if that company’s business model revolved around charging for exploitative access to a closed, proprietary protocol?
That makes sense to me, though personally if I had to buy Mac hardware to enable the bridge I’d be inclined to go all-in with a self-rolled solution anyways, and fully route everything through the Mac. I just can’t bring myself to trust a company like Beeper after their pypush stunt.
The intersection of users who simultaneously use Android/Linux/Windows/Mac/iPhone (I’m part of the latter four) is small to begin with, and then additionally requiring the purchase of a Mac to even enable bridging capability pretty much excludes this to tech enthusiasts interested in bridging their iPhone/Mac with their other devices. Or in other words, it can’t really be advertised as Beeper “Mini” anymore…
They’re suggesting to piggy-back off acquaintances Macs since a single one is fine for 10-20 accounts per their reporting. At that point I wonder if you could spin minimal Hackintosh install in a VM to keep it going.
Meh, it all sounds unsustainable in the end IMO. I mean, OG Beeper Mini was built on piggybacking off of a set of Mac Mini serial numbers, and Apple already plugged that hole.
Even then, internalized testing of an exploit and what actions a company would tolerate from abusing that exploit is very different from what that same company would tolerate once the exploit becomes publicly available. This is coming from personal experience — back in my “seedier” days I’d fuck around with random public APIs for the fun of it to see what I can do, and with my own “internal testing” I found I could get away with a lot. Once I shared that knowledge with others, I found that companies are far more willing to crack down on abuses of their API than my “internal testing” suggested otherwise.
I fully expect that Apple will probably revise the “10-20 accounts per Mac” fact once this fix actually starts to kick off.
So, essentially, it’s just a shitty company-operated clone of BlueBubbles now? What does Beeper offer now that a BlueBubbles solution doesn’t?
For example, it’s possible to self host and proxy BlueBubbles through an Nginx server on a VPS, which, when combined with connectivity to a Mac through local network/VPN handwavium, and proper security/authentication, allows you to securely access your iMessages on a public Internet domain through a web browser. Why should I trust some company’s band-aided implementation of that over rolling my own community-backed solution, especially if that company’s business model revolved around charging for exploitative access to a closed, proprietary protocol?
Beeper doesn’t route every message through the bridge, just authenticates there periodically. They’re also open sourcing that bridge now.
That makes sense to me, though personally if I had to buy Mac hardware to enable the bridge I’d be inclined to go all-in with a self-rolled solution anyways, and fully route everything through the Mac. I just can’t bring myself to trust a company like Beeper after their
pypushstunt.The intersection of users who simultaneously use Android/Linux/Windows/Mac/iPhone (I’m part of the latter four) is small to begin with, and then additionally requiring the purchase of a Mac to even enable bridging capability pretty much excludes this to tech enthusiasts interested in bridging their iPhone/Mac with their other devices. Or in other words, it can’t really be advertised as Beeper “Mini” anymore…
They’re suggesting to piggy-back off acquaintances Macs since a single one is fine for 10-20 accounts per their reporting. At that point I wonder if you could spin minimal Hackintosh install in a VM to keep it going.
Meh, it all sounds unsustainable in the end IMO. I mean, OG Beeper Mini was built on piggybacking off of a set of Mac Mini serial numbers, and Apple already plugged that hole.
Even then, internalized testing of an exploit and what actions a company would tolerate from abusing that exploit is very different from what that same company would tolerate once the exploit becomes publicly available. This is coming from personal experience — back in my “seedier” days I’d fuck around with random public APIs for the fun of it to see what I can do, and with my own “internal testing” I found I could get away with a lot. Once I shared that knowledge with others, I found that companies are far more willing to crack down on abuses of their API than my “internal testing” suggested otherwise.
I fully expect that Apple will probably revise the “10-20 accounts per Mac” fact once this fix actually starts to kick off.