
Sources say China used iPhone hacks to target Uyghur Muslims - djug
https://techcrunch.com/2019/08/31/china-google-iphone-uyghur/
======
bluerobotcat
To add a bit of context, China forces Android users in Xinjiang to install
surveillance apps:

\- [https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/ne94dg/jingwang-app-no-
en...](https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/ne94dg/jingwang-app-no-encryption-
china-force-install-urumqi-xinjiang)

\- [https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/7xgame/at-chinese-
border-...](https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/7xgame/at-chinese-border-
tourists-forced-to-install-a-text-stealing-piece-of-malware)

Such apps wouldn't work on iOS, due to its tighter security. But apparently if
you're China that's not much of a deterrent, because you can just buy a
rootkit to get around such limitations.

~~~
fredgrott
supposedly Fuchsia closes that hole

------
word-reader
So we now know that drive-by rooting of even "locked-down" and "secure" user
devices like the iPhone is possible and in active use by state actors. What
are the odds that other governments, even the US (which has the additional
advantage of being able to gag Apple and Google), are doing this? Seems like
it would become a more important way to do surveillance as more data and
networks become encrypted.

------
Despegar
It's telling that Google wasn't willing to name China publicly and that
someone (most likely someone at Project Zero) had to leak it to this reporter
off-the-record. Maybe they still have some hope of re-entering China?

~~~
word-reader
It didn't have to be someone at Project Zero. Anyone with a bunch of network
logs could have searched for some of the fingerprints or URLs that were
publicly available and deduced the target from associated traffic.

------
api
This is semi off topic, but why (from a mainstream Chinese perspective) is
China targeting Uyghur Muslims? Is there just a general ideology of enforced
conformity or is this a special case?

~~~
wsxcde
Uighur's and Tibetans have historically not had significant ties with mainland
China. The Uighurs are Turkic and have closer cultural ties to the likes of
Kazakhstan. The Tibetans are more closely tied to India/Nepal.* After the Mao
revolution, the Chinese annexed these territories and started a huge bout of
propaganda claiming these regions were always part of China. The propaganda
has worked on the mainland Chinese, but obviously, the Uighurs and Tibetans
don't buy it because they know their own history. There's been some recent
unrest in Uighur autonomous region, so China is starting around round of
indoctrination and police state tactics.

*I know this is a controversial claim especially for people of Chinese origin. So if you doubt this, a couple of facts worth pointing out are the following. The Dalai Lama's government in exile is headquartered in Dharamshala in Northern India. Loads of Tibetan kings have had Nepali wives. Tibetan is most closely related to languages spoken in Ladakh, Sikkim, Bhutan and Nepal -- two of these are Indian states and the other two are effectively Indian protectorates. Some of the most important "gurus" in Tibetan Buddhism (e.g. Rinpoche aka Padmasambhava) were Indian. The Tibetan script is based on Brahmi which is an ancient Indian script that gave rise to all modern Indian scripts such as Devanagari (used for Hindi/Marathi etc.), Gurmukhi (used for Punjabi), Tamil, Kannada, Bengali, Assamese, etc.

~~~
mytailorisrich
Tibet has been close to China, as opposed to India for more than a thousand
years.

Sikkim is in India because of the British, not because it is "Indian" (so to
speak)... In fact it was in China's sphere of influence until the British took
it over.

~~~
wsxcde
> _Tibet has been close to China, as opposed to India for more than a thousand
> years._

That is just laughably false. If you live in the US, I suggest visiting a
Tibetan store to disabuse yourself of this communist propaganda. (There are
tons of Tibetan stores in Berkeley, CA for instance.) You'll find them selling
many items that are instantly recognizable to Indians that Chinese people
wouldn't have a clue about. Things like Ganesha figurines, Rudrakhsha malas
and kurtis.

An easier option is to try asking an actual Tibetan person. They'll tell you
the same thing that I'm saying.

~~~
mytailorisrich
I am not looking for political battles here or to spread propaganda from
either side. I am not sure that a Tibetan store in Berkeley CA is a neutral
and accurate representation of Tibet's history.

The starting point is that geography makes access to the Tibet region much
easier from the East and North than from the South. So-called "Greater Tibet"
extends East and North East quite beyond the current Tibet Autonomous Region
in China.

Perhaps as a consequence, Tibetan are ethnically closer to East Asians than to
South Asians (I think that is visually obvious). Their language is not related
to Indian languages and neither is traditional clothing.

Historically Tibet has had close contacts with China and was periodically
under Chinese vassality/rule since at least the Tang Dynasty in the 7th
century.

To claim that Tibet "has historically not had significant ties with China" is
simply not accurate.

Likewise, Xinjiang/Uyghurs have had ties with China for even longer because of
the silk road, with China establishing a protectorate over the area in the Han
Dynasty about 2,000 years ago.

~~~
wsxcde
> * I am not looking for political battles here or to spread propaganda from
> either side. I am not sure that a Tibetan store in Berkeley CA is a neutral
> and accurate representation of Tibet's history.*

What do you think is an accurate representation of Tibetan history? I've also
been to Dharamshala and spoken to Tibetans in exile. They also echoed similar
views, which I'm guess you will now discard as being unrepresentative of
Tibetan history.

> _The starting point is that geography makes access to the Tibet region much
> easier from the East and North than from the South. So-called "Greater
> Tibet" extends East and North East quite beyond the current Tibet Autonomous
> Region in China._

Greater Tibet is a made-up concept. It includes places like Arunachal Pradesh
where Hindus outnumber Buddhists, and Hindus themselves are outnumbered by
Christians. The same width Ladakh. It's just communist propaganda to justify a
Chinese land grab.

> _Perhaps as a consequence, Tibetan are ethnically closer to East Asians than
> to South Asians (I think that is visually obvious)._

Thank you for your opinion, but I'm not interested in 18th century racist
tropes.

> _Their language is not related to Indian languages and neither is
> traditional clothing._

I like how you dismiss the fact that their script is directly derived from
Brahmi but consider their language very important. For the record though,
plenty of languages related to Tibetan are spoken in the north and north east
of India.

Also enlighten us on what you think traditional Indian clothing is, and what
traditional Tibetan clothing is.

> _Historically Tibet has had close contacts with China and was periodically
> under Chinese vassality /rule since at least the Tang Dynasty in the 7th
> century._

Yes, the Chinese have repeatedly tried to invade Tibet. If you think that is a
claim for Chinese culture being close to Tibetan culture, I don't know what to
tell you! Do you also think that French culture is similar to Arab culture
because the "Holy" Roman emperors repeatedly tried to invade Jerusalem?

