Is there a WPS button on an iPhone

Inherently in secure? Here is the problem with people who don't know the answer to the question. Wps requires you to push a physical button. It's active for 30-60 seconds. The problem is for apple products wanting to be proprietary and not work with a standard. It has not been an issue for apple users until the last five years. If the format standard does not generate revenue for apple it does not get attention. Apple product have had tons of advancements for the government and industries. Not for the consumer though. They have made changes to keep people in line and purchasing the proprietary manners for License for multimedia. That makes the money. Security is only a by product to keep you locked into their product and mentality. It people are lazy by nature and like you to think they know everything. Most of them haven't got the will to get out of their own way. There is the truth in the answer.

Yes WPS does have its flaws, but for a quick connection WPS is an excellent feature. I'm actually shocked IPhone 7 does not have this feature. I suppose if I was transfer to sensitive information I would be concerned about WPS,

but for a basic web connection it's a great feature.

Anyone dropping support for WPS is not in the least behind in technology. They are merely current. It is idiotic to continue to support and perpetuate an inherently insecure “security” feature. WPS was a joke of a security option from its inception. It’s no better than locking up your house with strips of duct tape and claiming you’ve now secured the premises.

Apple has very deliberately and knowingly refused to support WPS just as they have not supported, or dropped support, for other security standards over the years that have been shown to be inherently insecure and flawed.

I would never knowingly pick any device for my own use that still uses or offers WPS - the presence of that very feature is compelling evidence of a company that really doesn’t care one wit about security at all.

Why? What does the iPhone not having WPS capability have to do with your printer?

However the printer connects to a Wifi network is independent to how the iPhone connects to the same Wifi network.

Once both are connected, and assuming your Printer is AirPrint compatible, the iPhone should be able to see it and use it to print.

About AirPrint - Apple Support

So basically, if they don't offer a feature its because they simply can't offer it. They are incapable of offering it, rather than actually choosing not to based on facts that have already been given here?

The have made no progress because they choose not to include an old and superseded feature like WPS? How is to progress, when you need to go back to include an old feature you stopped including in favor of a more secure successor?

And no, I can critique Apple left and right for many things they have done. The lack of updates on the Mac Mini, the poor attention given to the Mac Pro, the price of the iPhone X, and its general feature set. There's a lot of stuff to not like from Apple, and that Apple gets wrong But to say they are incapable, because they have not done something that is at its core a security hazard like WPS, is just supremely silly.

What you mean to say, is Apple should include every feature under the sun, regardless of how insecure, ridiculous or pointless it may be simply to prove to you that they can actually include it.

You can offer feedback to Apple for any features you may want at Feedback - iPhone - Apple if you really want to. Apple is known to read all feedback, but may not respond directly.

Note that you may want to provide a good case for them to include something as insecure as WPS, and no just to prove that they can is not a good case.

If you check most of the new routers coming out do not support WPS at all and even at 30 to 60 seconds it is a security risk. But the hole is there regardless of pushing a button. The rest of your post is an incoherent mishmash and not worth addressing.

kevieci wrote:

The problem is for apple products wanting to be proprietary and not work with a standard.

iOS and OS X do indeed support an industry standard security - WPA2(AES). It is by far the most widely support industry standard for consumer wifi security.

A security feature with known and easily exploited flaws is useless. There is no point in perpetuating such a system.

If you're concerned about security, then WPS should be avoided at all costs. If you're not concerned about security, then just use an open unprotected wifi connection and don't even bother with something that adds no real security anyway.

But no responsible IT or tech company should continue to support known vulnerable systems or features. Especially so when wide spread and industry standard secure alternatives do exist.

Then you are most likely trying to use a printer that doesn't support iOS. AirPrint enabled printers simply need to be on the same WiFi network as the iOS device. It doesn't require WPS. If the printer doesn't support AirPrint, you'll most likely need an app from the manufacturer to print.

The reason why Apple is behind and dropping back further on many features and standards, it seems to me as a technically competent observer from afar, is possibly that even though such a company has a leadership role and plenty of money, it seems it has too many things on its plate to finish it all without pushing away the plate. The problem isn’t anything to do with the WPS standard or any such thing. If you look at so many things Apple cannot yet accomplish: don’t excuse them due to ill conceived standards. The problem is Apple can’t get it done. It’s no longer fully responsive to its client base. Embarrassing Really. Inexcusable and embarrassing.

Perhaps Apple needs additional advisors from its client base. Beta iOS 11 nearly killed my phone! for example. Argh! :(

Oh, in addition to what I’ve already said as my opinion, I’m going to make a joke (not to be taken seriously)....

The other reasons include: Apple doesn’t have as effective a corporate espionage program as Samsung did!

lol

See? It’s just a joke. No harm intended to either Samsung or Apple by way of my mild jest. :)

Thank you Mr. Finch. I’m not going to get into a pishing contest with anyone here. I’ll strive to remain constructive, except for my initial sentiment about the state of that union.

Still, I will disclose that as formerly a Technical Development Prime of multi-million dollar projects, and having a twenty year career in that, and having personally implemented a great many Mission Critical Software Systems in the telecommunications industry requiring real-time processing and five-nines reliability, ... and I possessing knowledge of fault tolerance, systems redundancy. And having personally implemented the user interfaces of all of my systems that I’ve personally been either solely or a contributor designing implementing and testing, training , deploying into operations, and either/and specifying or implementing systems integration requirements and interfaces, and even developing components entirely from scratch for years wherever necessary yet the industry didn’t have component libraries available, and having performed all activities from attending pre-sales meetings as a subject matter expert, defining user requirements , design, detailed designs, and having eaten, breathing sleeping and speaking detailed APIs for years, and having been self-taught Apple ][ and ][+ hardware design as a very young teen; and going from there to university, initially specializing in hardware design, but the getting a mathematics and computing degree. ...

Oh and having intimate knowledge of firmware and real time design at the level of the machine, and programming from the hexadecimal system up to database schema normalization and design, and having written ORB/CORBA implementations using first principles, and programmed in many languages... phew.

I also know software implementations can overcome and protect against (safeguard) against insecure interface specifications by developing stateful session handling, catching violations, etc.

When I make a quip about something,

although I do it lightly, I know what kernel of truth it encompasses, and what is the way forward!

:)

There.

My bladder is half empty! LOL

I’ll be well behaved hence forth if I haven’t sounded entirely sunshine in this reply. I am subdshine. :)

Cheers.

I believe the point of the person who began the original discussion (it wasn’t me) wasn’t to have a discussion about its merits. Rather, I arrived here today for the same reasons/purposes as the first party:

Asking about whether an in-common-use and helpful-to-the-non-technical consumer feature is or isn’t available on a technically advanced iPhone so that as a guest in someone else’s household he/she can ask permission to press the “recycling icon” button so as obtain wifi access at someone else’s home, rather than prying into otherwise “private matters” of asking for a password.

This is the very reasons private / private key cryptology exists: so people don’t exchange primary passwords via clear text.

It was more of a “why can’t my TV do what every other TV today does?!”

Not an invitation to blame the specification.

If the next new thing is implemented into routers, Good.

Meanwhile, I’m inconvenienced as much as he/she, and all other non-Android users by having to take extra steps to connect.

And I shan’t digress any further. I’ll detach myself from this discussion.

I simply felt “offended” that the blame for lacking a convenience feature was deflected unto a specification instead of Apple saying Oops. And fessing up to “Sorry to all users for our inconveniencing you all.”

I’ve had to use many ill-fitted or incomplete specifications. I didn’t ever say. Sorry I can’t deliver due to a bad industry-wide specifications.

I would have been replaced by someone who could!

If the specification was approved, it has utility and merit. Who you gonna blame?!

Hey, blame me because I mentioned it. Not!

lol

Goodnight and goodbye.

Well, you have you’re opinion. I utterly and completely disagree. Companies should take on the responsibility of educating consumers when they are trying to use a pointless and potentially harmful security feature. Simple providing it because an uneducated public demands it for convenience is not being a responsible corporate citizen.

Apple has a decade’s long tradition of not supporting, or dropping support for poor industry standards once their flaws or fundamental inadequacies are identified. I think that is highly commendable.

Many people don’t understand IT security issues at all, and blindly trust the hardware and software they have to be secure when it says it is. WPS is not secure - it is fundamentally and inherently flawed and offers no real security at all. So why should any company that truly values and respects personal data security continue to support it? That’s hypocritical to do so, and highly misleading to the consumer.

Do you really want a company that just panders up whatever people demand, or one that claims they are sincere about your data security and your privacy and then acts appropriately to honor that stated commitment? I certainly know what company would get my business given those two alternatives.

dontbyte wrote:

Perhaps Apple needs additional advisors from its client base. Beta iOS 11 nearly killed my phone! for example. Argh! :(

I'm assuming this was your extra iPhone, right? As someone of your background would know better than to install beta software on a device they depended on for everyday use.