Apple announced yesterday that the company has opened up its cryptographic libraries so that third-party developers can build more "advanced security features" into their apps (via VentureBeat). The cryptographic libraries being opened to developers are the same ones Apple uses to protect iOS and OS X, as Apple notes on its updated site.

crypto libraries
Developers will have access to two of the company's advanced security features, including Security Framework and Common Crypto. Security Framework gives developers tools for organizing certificates, public and private keys, and trust policies, ensuring that all sensitive information is stored privately in a "secure repository for sensitive user data." Common Crypto library provides additional support for symmetric encryption, hash-based message authentication codes, and digests.

Both Security Framework and Common Crypto rely on the corecrypto library to provide implementations of low level cryptographic primitives. This is also the library submitted for validation of compliance with U.S. Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) 140-2 Level 1. Although corecrypto does not directly provide programming interfaces for developers and should not be used by iOS or OS X apps, the source code is available to allow for verification of its security characteristics and correct functioning.

Check out Apple's official website for reference sheets, service guides, and links to the open source releases for Security Framework and Common Crypto libraries.

Top Rated Comments

SpinThis! Avatar
123 months ago
That was my thought as well. Plus, could this knowledge enable a small "back door" that the government has been pestering Apple about?
No. It doesn't matter. Good security isn't based on obscurity. The current security we have is based on our collective knowledge of mathematics. It's good that Apple is opening this up. If developers need to do secure hashing or what not, it's better to use a tried and tested crypto algorithm than trying to roll your own.
Score: 5 Votes (Like | Disagree)
RabidMacFan Avatar
123 months ago
This seems misreported. The only thing new here is the source code for corecrypto. This does not appear to be made to allow third-party-developers to implement new security API's. From the page itself:

Both Security Framework and Common Crypto rely on the corecrypto library to provide implementations of low level cryptographic primitives. This is also the library submitted for validation of compliance with U.S. Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) 140-2 Level 1. Although corecrypto does not directly provide programming interfaces for developers and should not be used by iOS or OS X apps, the source code is available to allow for verification of its security characteristics and correct functioning.

(emphasis is mine)

From what I can understand, there are no new usable libraries or API's here. OS X and iOS developers can use Apple's existing Security Framework and Common Crypto services like they have always done.

Whats new is that the source code for the CoreCrypto library that Security Framework and Common Crypto use is available. This allows developers and security professionals to better understand what the existing frameworks were already doing in the background.

One of the benefits of this release is to allow auditing of the source code, and to give assurance to developers with a "trust no one" attitude that the built-in libraries are secure and safe to use.
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Bob Zimmerman Avatar
123 months ago
No, as others said, security comes from having good practices, not by keeping your practices secret.

Linux is generally regarded as the most secure platform, even though it's completely open source. Lots of people have read through the code looking for weaknesses, and lots of people have contributed fixes for any weaknesses they find.
Linux's security reputation is actually pretty bad. BSDs and UNIX variants have a good reputation. OpenBSD in particular is highly-regarded, in part because they audit changes rather stringently. Windows is getting better, and Linux is getting significantly worse.

OpenSSL is an extremely strong proof against the idea that open source is inherently more secure. It had tremendous numbers of very serious flaws that had been in it for years. Just because people can look at the code doesn't mean that they do. That's why the OpenBSD foundation forked OpenSSL, removed tons of options, and started developing it with their audit model as LibreSSL. It's why the OpenBSD guys recently replaced sudo with a new tool called doas that has far fewer options and as a result, far less that can go wrong.

In my experience, much software developed for Linux is built on the platform because it's free and it lets the developers work very quickly. Tons of open-source code runs on Linux, so you just have to download a bunch of libraries and write glue code to get them to do what you want. Unfortunately, many don't take the time to set up their application to run properly under a non-root user account. For that matter, the recommended installation method for a lot of software now is to run curl to fetch a URL, then pipe the output to a root-level bash shell. That is literally telling your system to do whatever some web server or anything claiming to be that server tells it to do.
Score: 3 Votes (Like | Disagree)
ChrisA Avatar
122 months ago
What could go wrong?

:apple:
Not much. Even if the code were kept closed, people can look at the running binary code. It is not that hard to read. In the old days I used to write in Cobol for IBM mainframes and it was common to get a "core dump". This was a printed hexadecimal dump of the computer's RAM to paper. We'd plow through it with a pencil and figure out what went wrong. We did not have debuggers. Anyone can still do this if they take the time. The Intel instruction set is more complex than was IBM360 but not by much.

Certainly the average user can't read a hex dump of a closed source crypto library but many people can. So closing it just makes it harder to read, not impossible.

That said, there are systems were the executable code itself is encrypted. These are completely unreadable and I'd worry there are backdoors and whatever in there
Score: 2 Votes (Like | Disagree)
ArtOfWarfare Avatar
123 months ago
That was my thought as well. Plus, could this knowledge enable a small "back door" that the government has been pestering Apple about?
No, as others said, security comes from having good practices, not by keeping your practices secret.

Linux is generally regarded as the most secure platform, even though it's completely open source. Lots of people have read through the code looking for weaknesses, and lots of people have contributed fixes for any weaknesses they find.
Score: 2 Votes (Like | Disagree)
.max Avatar
123 months ago
This seems misreported.
I agree. The misinterpretation is in this phrase in the article: "Developers will have access to two of the company's advanced security features". Developers have had access to these features for years.

What's different is that now, for example, they can use the open source code and be sure that there are no backdoors. If Apple has (or would be forced in the future to have) backdoors in the system, apps compiled with the open source code would be at less risk.
Score: 1 Votes (Like | Disagree)

Popular Stories

iOS 19 visionOS UI Elements

iOS 19 to Have Some of the 'Biggest' Design Changes in iPhone's History

Sunday March 16, 2025 10:35 am PDT by
Apple is planning some of the "biggest iOS and macOS redesigns in its history," according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman. In his Power On newsletter today, Gurman reiterated that iOS 19 will have a visionOS-like design with more transparent interfaces:The new interfaces will adopt the design principles introduced in visionOS, the software for Apple's Vision Pro headset. That includes greater...
airpods pro 2 gradient

AirPods Pro 3 Launch Now Just Months Away: Here's What We Know

Tuesday March 11, 2025 3:26 am PDT by
Despite being released over two years ago, Apple's AirPods Pro 2 continue to dominate the wireless earbud market. However, with the AirPods Pro 3 expected to launch in 2025, anyone thinking of buying Apple's premium earbuds may be wondering if the next generation is worth holding out for. Apart from their audio and noise-canceling performance, which are generally regarded as excellent for...
iphone 17 pro asherdipps

iPhone 17 Pro Max Rumors Allegedly Refer to 'iPhone 17 Ultra' Model

Friday March 14, 2025 7:56 am PDT by
If you've been following iPhone rumors over the last few years, you may remember reading reports that Apple flirted with the idea of introducing a super high-end "Ultra" model that would either replace its Pro Max device or sit above it in Apple's smartphone hirearchy. These reports appeared in the pre-launch iPhone 15 and iPhone 16 rumor cycles, but ultimately came to nothing. Now though, the...
iPhone 17 Air Size Feature

Ultra-Thin 'iPhone 17 Air' Rumored to Include These 12 Features

Saturday March 15, 2025 10:50 am PDT by
While the so-called "iPhone 17 Air" is not expected to launch until September, there are already plenty of rumors about the ultra-thin device. Overall, the "iPhone 17 Air" sounds like a mixed bag. While the device is expected to have an impressively thin and light design, rumors indicate it will have some compromises compared to iPhone 17 Pro models, including only a single rear camera, a...
Bent iPhone Air Feature

Apple Canned Larger iPhone 17 Air Model Over Fears of Bendgate 2.0

Monday March 17, 2025 4:07 am PDT by
Apple prototyped a larger ultra-slim iPhone 17 Air with a 6.9-inch display, but ultimately decided not to go ahead with the device because of fears that it could be susceptible to bending, according to a new report. Bloomberg reporter Mark Gurman, writing in his latest Power On newsletter: When it first started work on the phone, it prototyped a device with a 6.9-inch screen — matching...
iphone 16 pro models 1

Apple's First Foldable iPhone Estimated to Cost Nearly Twice as Much as iPhone 16 Pro Max

Monday March 17, 2025 6:42 am PDT by
In an investor research note today with British bank Barclays, analyst Tim Long said Apple's first foldable iPhone could have a starting price in the $2,300 range in the United States, which would make it by far the most expensive iPhone model ever. If the first foldable iPhone starts at $2,299, that means it would cost nearly twice as much as the iPhone 16 Pro Max, which starts at $1,199. ...
iPhone 17 Air Size Feature

'iPhone 17 Air' Rumored to Start at $899 With Surprisingly Good Battery Life, Camera Control, and More

Sunday March 16, 2025 9:05 am PDT by
Bloomberg's Mark Gurman today shared some new details about the rumored iPhone 17 Air. In his Power On newsletter, Gurman said he was told that the device may start at roughly $899 in the U.S., which means that it would occupy the same price point as the iPhone 16 Plus. This would make sense, as it has been widely rumored that the Air model will take over the Plus model's spot in the iPhone...
apple surveyor app

Apple Launches 'Surveyor' App for Apple Maps Data Collection

Friday March 14, 2025 10:38 am PDT by
Apple today launched a new app called Surveyor, which is designed to allow users to collect data like images of street signs and roadside details to improve Apple Maps. The app is not public facing and appears to be for use with companies that Apple partners with to assign mapping tasks. Downloading the app and opening it up directs users to "Open Partner App" to choose a task. Tapping on...
iphone 16e usb c feature

'iPhone 17 Air' is Step Towards Slimmer iPhones Without USB-C Ports

Sunday March 16, 2025 9:36 am PDT by
Apple considered launching the iPhone 17 Air without a USB-C charging port, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman. In his Power On newsletter today, Gurman said that while Apple ultimately decided against making the iPhone 17 Air its first iPhone model without a charging port, the idea is still on the table for future iPhone models. He said the iPhone 17 Air will "foreshadow a move to...