I wonder why Apple stans never bring this up when calling it the most private operating system that "cares" about user "privacy" and "security" when they can just hand over your E2EE messages after it's decrypted, if a company has a "plugin".

I don’t really understand what the point is you’re trying to make here.

What does Apple have to do with what somebody you’re sending texts to does with the texts you sent them? What is any company supposed to do about that?

But has Apple ever allowed a third party cloud service to integrate with your text messages at the request of your best friend on their phone?

E2EE solves the Two Generals Problem. There’s also the issue of flat out letting the bad guys in.

But they're different! They're so privacy focused! They care about their customers more than the other guy!

...and other such silliness I have heard on certain forums.

From the article…

I want to make one technical point absolutely clear because several people have misunderstood my argument:

The encryption still works. OpenAl hasn't cracked or mathematically broken iMessage encryption. An iMessage remains encrypted between endpoints. The privacy problem occurs at the endpoint.

Once the message has been decrypted on the recipient's Mac, that recipient can authorise third party software to access the readable conversation. The encryption worked exactly as designed. It simply can't protect message content from software authorised to access it before or after decryption.

That's what I mean when I say this integration undermines the purpose of end to end encryption.

The problem is Apple controls the keys.

No, the age verification that they weren't actually obligated to do