Anonymous 09/03/2017 (Sun) 18:33:31 No. 11014 del
>>10995
>>why does this guy give mic access to instagram?
>Because that's what 99% of the normies is doing.
nevermind, i forgot instagram has videos. i guess you can record yourself and upload a video. they could easily make it so programs only get mic/camera access when they need it, but who really cares? phone security is just completely broken in the first place
>Someone should do reverse engineering on this shit.
i doubt it's hard. dunno what hipsters use these days but back when apple crap used objective C it was especially easy because method names are put all over the source, similar to Java or C# but probably not as much info. AFAIK most phone crap doesn't use heavy obfuscation/protection stuff.
>>11005
>Does the version of iOS he's running even have fine-grained permission controls?
he has a screenshot showing that instagram has mic access granted
>>also why is the instragram "app" more than a few KLOC?
>We don't know how many lines of code it contains. It's closed source.
given from what they said it's obviously more than a few KLOC
>You're only looking at it from a consumption standpoint.
the client is only for "consumption". the server side shit is on the server. of course they probably use an embedded web browser instead of writing some real software, causing all sorts of complications. inb4 "hurr durr an instragram client is a non-trivial application"