Metaverse or Metaworse? How the Apple Vision Pro Stacks Up Against Predictions
By Numaan Huq, Roel Reyes
In August 2022, Trend Micro published a whitepaper titled, Metaverse or Metaworse? Cybersecurity Threats Against the Internet of Experiences. Back then, the world was still suffering from the aftereffects of the Covid-19 pandemic, working from home was the norm, Meta was making a multi-billion dollar push to build the metaverse as the next operating environment, and ChatGPT 3.5 would see general release at the end of November 2022.
To better understand the potential cyberthreats against the metaverse, we conducted extensive research and analysis throughout early 2022. When ChatGPT 3.5 was launched, and subsequently, ChatGPT 4 came out in March 2023, the world’s interest quickly transitioned into a future driven by AI and generative AI (GenAI). Unfortunately, one of the first victims of GenAI’s success was the metaverse, which took a back seat to this new killer application. One of the things we surmised at that time was the metaverse lacked both a powerful headset and an operating environment that was integrated with an existing ecosystem, which is why interest in it fizzled.
Evaluating the Apple Vision Pro as a Metaverse Headset
In June 2023, Apple announced the Apple Vision Pro (AVP), a “spatial computer” running on a mixed reality operating system (OS) called visionOS. This was exciting news because there was finally a headset that may be capable of doing many of things that the metaverse promised. The AVP headset was released in the US in February 2024, but was region-locked. It was made available in Canada, Australia, and some EU countries later in July 2024. Given our global team, obtaining a fully functional unit with access to all its features required coordination across different regions, which created a delay in obtaining a fully functional unit that allowed us access to all its features globally. Outside of playing with the device and programming apps for visionOS, we went about trying to figure out how the AVP stacked up against the headset predictions we made in our Metaverse or Metaworse paper (Table 1) that was published almost a year before the AVP was announced. In our paper, we had speculated what features a future AR/VR headset needed to allow for a truly immersive metaverse experience.
| Category | Prediction from paper | Apple Vision Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Proliferation and Adoption of Headsets | Initial Adoption in Developed Countries: The metaverse will first be adopted by developed countries with well-established telecommunications networks and users who can afford the high cost of AR/VR headsets. Widespread adoption will happen over time as the technology becomes more affordable, similar to smartphones. | High cost limits initial adoption to developed countries who have the purchasing power and good telecommunications infrastructure. |
| Increased Data Processing at Endpoints: AR/VR headsets will become powerful computing platforms that process significant amounts of sensitive data locally, making them attractive targets for cybercriminals. | Apple prioritizes privacy but processes significant data locally, making AVPs lucrative targets. The AVP is powered by a desktop class M2 processor, which is powerful enough to handle the computing needs. | |
| Collection of Biometric Data: Advanced sensors, such as iris-tracking, in headsets will expose users to risks of biometric data theft, including iris patterns and body movement data. | AVP uses iris scanning (Optic ID) for authentication and does eye tracking. It currently doesn’t support body tracking, but has all the hardware to support this feature in the future. | |
| Data Sovereignty Challenges: Headsets will collect data processed and stored globally, creating difficulties in enforcing data protection regulations and ensuring compliance. | Data processing is typically local but may integrate with cloud, leading to data sovereignty issues. | |
| Cyber-Physical and Safety Threats | Risk of Physical Harm through Malicious Code: Attackers could manipulate headset outputs to cause adverse health effects, such as triggering seizures or disorientation. | Apple has strong safety measures, but is still susceptible if the OS or an app is compromised. |
| Exploitation of Sensory Outputs: Attackers could manipulate the sensory outputs of headsets, such as visual, auditory, or haptic feedback, causing physical discomfort or psychological stress. | Potential vulnerabilities exist, but Apple's app ecosystem prioritizes security to mitigate these risks. | |
| Software Vulnerabilities and Malware | Malware Targeting Headsets: AR/VR headsets are likely to become targets for malware, compromising user data, spying through cameras and microphones, or disrupting device functionality. | Apple’s controlled ecosystem reduces risk, but malware can still target endpoints, especially if there are exploitable vulnerabilities in the OS. |
| Exploiting Software Vulnerabilities: Attackers could exploit vulnerabilities in headset software to gain unauthorized access and control over devices. | Apple's regular software updates reduce vulnerabilities, but exploitation is still possible as demonstrated by attacks against iOS. | |
| Social Engineering and Impersonation Threats | Deepfakes and Impersonation: Advanced graphics capabilities of headsets could be used to create convincing deepfake avatars, impersonating trusted figures to spread misinformation or commit fraud. | AVP supports advanced graphics, but visionOS currently doesn’t support multi-user virtual spaces, so the risk of deepfakes and impersonation is as likely as on a regular PC. This can change as visionOS introduces new features and capabilities. |
| Phishing in Immersive Environments: Immersive experiences in headsets make users more vulnerable to phishing attacks that impersonate legitimate entities. | Apple ecosystem limits phishing to some extent, but immersive phishing attacks are still possible, especially when visionOS will support multi-user virtual spaces. | |
| Integration with IoT and Smart Infrastructure | Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) Attacks: Headsets interacting with IoT and smart city infrastructure could be vulnerable to MitM attacks, allowing attackers to intercept or alter data communications. | Apple integrates secure communication protocols, reducing MitM risk, but not eliminating it. Individual apps that use proprietary communications protocols could be susceptible to MitM attacks. |
| Unauthorized Access to Critical Infrastructure: Headsets could provide entry points for unauthorized access to cyber-physical environments, including critical infrastructure systems. | Apple's closed ecosystem and security features reduce this risk, but IoT integration still poses challenges. | |
| Content Moderation and Health Concerns | Content Moderation Challenges: Ensuring appropriate content in immersive environments is challenging, with risks of exposing users to harassment, hate speech, or harmful content. | Apple has strict content control, but user-generated content moderation could still pose challenges especially in a multi-user VR space. |
| Health and Safety Regulations: Prolonged use of AR/VR headsets may cause physical discomfort, such as eye strain and motion sickness, necessitating new health regulations. Malicious manipulation could exacerbate these effects. | Apple includes comfort features, but prolonged use will cause discomfort on the neck because of the weight and design of the headset. | |
| Headset Accessibility and Hardware Dependency | Hardware Accessibility Barriers: High costs and limited availability of AR/VR headsets could create a digital divide, restricting access to the metaverse to those who can afford the technology. | AVP's high cost makes it inaccessible to many users initially. |
| Pushback from Established Ecosystems: Dependence on headsets may face resistance from users accustomed to smartphones, which have a larger user base. | Apple's integration with its broader ecosystem is expected to ease resistance, but still relies on specialized hardware. | |
| Cybersecurity Risks in Planning Real-World Activities | Planning Real-World Crimes: Criminals may use headsets to explore virtual replicas of real-world locations to plan and rehearse crimes. | Limited by Apple’s restricted ecosystem, but risks remain if users gain access to replica environments or digital twins accessible via the AVP. |
| Accessing Hidden Metaverse Spaces (Darkverse): Specialized headsets might be used to access hidden areas of the metaverse, facilitating illegal activities. | For now, the Apple ecosystem doesn’t support multi-user VR ecosystems so no Darkverse exists. But running a browser with Onion support will allow users to access the Dark Web. | |
| Identity and Authentication Concerns | Challenges with Avatar-Based Identities: Use of multiple avatars through headsets complicates identity verification, making it difficult to establish trust and increases impersonation risks. | Apple’s secure ecosystem and privacy controls is expected to reduce risks, but avatar-based identity challenges remain. |
Biometric Authentication Risks: Biometric data collected by headsets for authentication could be compromised, leading to identity theft or unauthorized access.| Apple has robust biometric security, but local storage still poses a risk if compromised especially as Apple uses Optic ID (iris scanning) for authentication. | |
Table 1. Comparison of Apple Vision Pro against the metaverse headset predictions in our paper, “Metaverse or Metaworse? Cybersecurity Threats Against the Internet of Experiences”
All things considered, AVP fits our predictions, especially with relation to restricted early adoption in wealthy nations resulting from its greater cost. Apple stresses security and privacy, yet the AVP still poses possible risks in data processing, biometric data collection, and software flaws. Continuous evaluation will be required as the AVP and visionOS develops and acquires additional features and capabilities, to properly evaluate its influence and handle new issues.
VisionOS as a Metaverse Platform
A metaverse-compatible AR/VR headset will not just be about the hardware, but also the OS and an interconnected operating environment. Next, we look at how visionOS stacks up as a potential metaverse platform (Table 2).
| Category | Prediction from paper | Details | Apple Vision Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Core Technology Requirements | Convergence of AR/VR/MR/XR, IoT, AI/ML, DLT, Spatial Web, and IPv6: The metaverse requires a convergence of multiple emerging technologies such as AR/VR/MR/XR, IoT, AI/ML, DLT, the Spatial Web, and IPv6. | Integration of these technologies will enable an interactive, multi-vendor operating environment that forms the backbone of the metaverse. | The AVP supports AR/VR and will support AI/ML capabilities through visionOS but lacks direct IoT, DLT, or Spatial Web integrations as of current release. |
| New Interactive Application Layer: A new interactive application layer is required to integrate and manage all these technologies, effectively creating an "internet of experiences" on top of the existing internet infrastructure. | This layer will enable users to experience immersive applications while maintaining communication between different technologies and devices. | VisionOS provides a foundation for building interactive AR/VR applications, but it currently lacks extensive multi-vendor integration capabilities and also doesn’t support multi-user spatial environments. | |
| Interoperability and Connectivity | Interoperable Multi-Vendor Platforms: The metaverse is envisioned as a multi-vendor, cloud-distributed platform where users can move seamlessly across virtual spaces, bringing their assets with them. This requires strong interoperability standards across different vendors and platforms. | Unlike traditional MMORPGs, the metaverse will allow users to transfer their virtual assets between different environments. This will required standardized protocols and agreements among various vendors to maintain interoperability. | VisionOS is primarily tied to Apple's ecosystem, making multi-vendor asset transfer challenging. |
| Spatial Web and Stateful Protocols: The metaverse will require new communication protocols that support both spatial data and statefulness. The Spatial Web and Hyperspace Transaction Protocol (HSTP) is proposed for providing secure and meaningful transfer of contextual data. | These new protocols will replace traditional ones like HTTP, as they are capable of understanding the context of the information being transferred, which is crucial for linking physical and virtual worlds in a spatial environment. | VisionOS does not currently support the Spatial Web or HSTP, making it less suitable for the envisioned metaverse spatial connectivity. (Note – spatial computing and Spatial Web are two different things) | |
| Hardware and Devices | Mixed Reality Headsets and Connected Devices: To make the metaverse operational, widespread adoption of connected AR/VR/MR/XR headsets and other IoT devices is necessary. | Users will interact with the metaverse through these devices, which must be capable of rendering immersive environments in real-time while collecting contextual data from the surrounding environment. | The AVP is designed for AR/VR but currently lacks native IoT integration, which limits its connectivity to other devices in the metaverse. |
| Full-Body Actuator Suits and Physical Interfaces: The introduction of full-body actuator suits paired with omnidirectional treadmills will bring a deeper sense of immersion, allowing users to physically interact with the virtual world. | Such suits will enhance the sensory experience and be used in sectors like entertainment, simulating real-world physical sensations like wind or touch. | The current release of visionOS does not support full-body actuator suits, limiting physical immersion capabilities. The AVP has more than processing power to support this, but lacks visionOS support. | |
| Data and Privacy Challenges | Data Sovereignty Issues: The cloud-distributed nature of the metaverse will lead to data sovereignty challenges, as data will be processed and stored in multiple locations globally. | Ensuring compliance with local and international data protection laws will be difficult, especially given the vast amount of user-generated data processed in real time. | Apple emphasizes privacy with local data processing, but cloud services may still lead to data sovereignty issues. |
| Endpoint Data Processing: End-user devices (e.g., headsets, smart glasses) will process sensitive data locally, making them critical endpoints for both user identity and security. | This makes these endpoints lucrative targets for cybercriminals, especially given the amount of data being collected, which includes biometrics, location, and other personal information. | VisionOS processes significant data locally, making endpoint security critical; Apple implements privacy controls to mitigate risks, but visionOS can still be vulnerable to 0-day attacks that result in data compromise. | |
| Smart Contracts and Economy | Smart Contracts for Automation: Automation in the metaverse will heavily depend on smart contracts, which will be used for virtual transactions, ownership verification, and more. | These contracts will enable secure interactions between users, allowing virtual purchases and transactions without intermediaries. However, they will be susceptible to hacks and exploits if improperly designed. | VisionOS does not natively support blockchain or smart contracts, limiting its use for automated virtual transactions. |
| New Digital Economy and Decentralized Finance: The metaverse will foster a new heterogeneous digital economy involving cryptocurrencies (Bitcoin, Ethereum), fiat currency, e-transfers, and digital assets. | The metaverse economy will operate in a decentralized manner, making it a target for finance-savvy criminals looking to manipulate exchange rates or launder money through virtual assets. | VisionOS does not currently integrate with decentralized finance systems, limiting its participation in the new digital economy. | |
| Integration with IoT and Smart Infrastructure | Digital Twins for Critical Infrastructure: The metaverse will use digital twins for smart city infrastructure, enabling remote interactions with real-world systems like ICS/SCADA, accessed via immersive devices. | This integration will improve operational efficiency but will also expose critical infrastructure to potential cyber-physical threats through unauthorized access to digital twins. | VisionOS supports integration with digital twins via third-party tools like Unity. Enterprise users may already be using the AVP to interact with their own digital twins, including infrastructure. Public apps to interact with smart city infrastructure is still not available, but is technological possible with visionOS and the AVP headset. |
| Identity Management | Multiple Identities and Privacy: Users will have multiple virtual identities in the metaverse, raising significant concerns about identity management, privacy, and authentication. | Unlike traditional identity models, these multiple identities could lead to confusion and difficulties in establishing trust, especially since users may not reveal their real identities while moving between different virtual spaces. | VisionOS has robust privacy measures, but lacks specific features for managing multiple identities across different virtual spaces. Also, the current release of visionOS doesn’t support multi-user virtual spaces. |
| Health and Safety Regulations | Physical and Psychological Effects: Prolonged use of immersive devices like AR/VR headsets and full-body suits will require the development of new health and safety standards to address issues like eye strain, motion sickness, or psychological effects. | Given the immersive nature of the metaverse, regulatory standards will be necessary to prevent physical harm and ensure users are aware of the potential health risks associated with prolonged usage. | Apple has incorporated ergonomic considerations into the Vision Pro, but regulatory health standards for prolonged use are still missing. |
Table 2. Comparison of visionOS as a potential metaverse platform against the predictions in our paper, “Metaverse or Metaworse? Cybersecurity Threats Against the Internet of Experiences”
VisionOS shows great promise in supporting AR/VR apps, but, it currently does not have the essential integrations required for a completely realized metaverse. Its restrictions include difficulties with multi-vendor interoperability and multi-user spatial contexts, as well as the absence of direct IoT, DLT, and Spatial Web capabilities. VisionOS lacks support for smart contracts and distributed finance, even as it offers strong local data processing and privacy safeguards and addresses data sovereignty concerns. Although the AVP shows promise overall, more features are needed to satisfy the whole metaverse dream.
Cybersecurity of the AVP as a Metaverse Platform
Finally, we made cybersecurity predictions about the metaverse in our paper. Now we look at how our predictions are sizing up to spatial computing devices like the AVP (Table 3).
| Category | Prediction from paper | Details | Apple Vision Pro and visionOS |
|---|---|---|---|
| Privacy Issues | Ubiquitous Wiretap: The metaverse is expected to be subject to unlimited surveillance, where everything a user does can be monitored. | This is similar to how current social media services monetize user actions by collecting vast amounts of data. | Apple emphasizes privacy in its ecosystem, including visionOS. However, AVP’s AR/VR capabilities, including potential data sharing with cloud services, may still allow for some level of surveillance, particularly related to movement and interaction data. |
| Endpoint Data Processing: AR/VR headsets process user data locally, storing sensitive information like identity, biometrics, location, and payment data, making them attractive targets for hackers. | AVP's on-device data processing approach makes it a critical endpoint, especially considering the collection of highly sensitive data (e.g., iris-tracking and motion data). | Apple prioritizes on-device data processing and encryption, reducing but not eliminating risks associated with endpoint attacks. Biometric security features are intended to keep data secure but may still be vulnerable if the device is compromised. | |
| Data Sovereignty Challenges: The distributed nature of the metaverse will lead to data being processed and stored globally, creating compliance challenges with data protection laws. | Data is collected by user endpoints, stored, and processed in potentially many locations across the cloud-distributed metaverse. | VisionOS emphasizes privacy with local processing where possible, but the use of cloud services can still create data sovereignty issues depending on where data is stored or transmitted. | |
| Cyber-Physical Threats | Unauthorized Access to Digital Twins: Metaverse integration with critical infrastructure means potential cyber-physical threats, including unlawful access to digital twins. | Digital twins of physical infrastructure, accessible via AR/VR, could be targeted by attackers to manipulate physical environments remotely. | AVP can connect with digital twins via custom apps which may already be used by enterprise users. As AR/VR evolves, integration with IoT and infrastructure could create potential vulnerabilities in the future. |
| MitM Attacks: Interaction between users and smart infrastructure can lead to MitM attacks, allowing attackers to alter data exchanges or issue unauthorized commands. | AR-enabled glasses interacting with smart city infrastructure may open avenues for MitM attacks, especially in unprotected environments. | VisionOS and Apple's security architecture aim to protect data in transit using encryption, reducing MitM risks. However, interaction with third-party systems remains a potential vulnerability without proper safeguards. | |
| VR/AR/MR/XR Threats | Blueprint-based Attack Planning: Access to virtual replicas of real-world locations can allow attackers to plan physical entry points or attacks on those spaces. | Criminals could use detailed 3D models provided by AR/VR systems to plan attacks in real life. | AVP enables highly immersive experiences and detailed digital twin apps (if and when available) would enable these types of threat to become reality. |
| Social Engineering | Identity and Avatar Manipulation: Users may create multiple virtual identities, leading to identity confusion and increasing trust issues. | Criminals may leverage multiple avatars to commit fraud or impersonate other users. | VisionOS emphasizes user privacy and control but does not directly address issues regarding multiple virtual identities and their potential misuse. Avatars in immersive environments could still be used to manipulate or deceive others, but the latest release of visionOS doesn’t support multi-user virtual spaces. |
| Traditional IT Attacks | Endpoint Ransomware: AR/VR endpoints will likely become attractive targets for ransomware, potentially blocking users from accessing their devices or metaverse environments. | Criminals may use traditional ransomware tactics to compromise AR/VR devices, which store significant personal and payment data. | Like macOS, visionOS is also susceptible to ransomware attacks. As endpoints collecting user data and enabling user interactions, AR/VR devices could pose attractive targets for attackers. |
| API Vulnerabilities: Public APIs for metaverse platforms could become targets for exploitation, enabling attackers to introduce malicious code or gain unauthorized access. | Bad actors could exploit poorly secured APIs to access sensitive data or disrupt metaverse functionalities. | VisionOS offers a closed ecosystem with strict App Store guidelines, which helps mitigate risks related to API vulnerabilities. Still, as new AR/VR-specific APIs are developed, they may become targets for emerging threats, especially with third-party API enabled tools. | |
| Miscellaneous | Environmental Impact: Running graphics-heavy metaverse environments demands significant energy resources, posing environmental concerns. | Similar to bitcoin mining, the metaverse's resource-intensive requirements could lead to large-scale energy consumption. | The AVP is an energy-hungry device, with a full battery charge lasting around two hours of usage before needing a battery swap. The usage of AVP is currently very limited, so it’s hard to gauge what the environmental impacts will be of this device in the long term, and this will most definitely depend on device adoption by the masses. |
Table 3. Comparison of spatial computing devices against the predictions in our paper, “Metaverse or Metaworse? Cybersecurity Threats Against the Internet of Experiences”
While there are both privacy and security concerns, the AVP and visionOS give privacy and local data processing high priority. These cover issues with data sovereignty, endpoint attacks, and surveillance. Still areas of concern are cyber-physical hazards including illegal access to digital twins and conventional IT dangers such ransomware and API exploitation. Also, the AVP consumes a lot of energy as a full battery charge lasts about two hours of usage and this raises possible environmental impact worries.
Metaverse, AI, and AVP
Figure 1. Images that were created with DALL-E
While the metaverse took a backseat with the introduction of GenAI, AI in a spatial computer might just be the killer application that reignites interest in the metaverse. In June 2024 Apple introduced Apple Intelligence, which consists of an on-device model and a cloud model, along with ChatGPT integration. It will be supported on all M* processors (the AVP uses an M2 processor). While Apple Intelligence has not been officially announced for the AVP, it has been reported that we can expect to see it incorporated into the headset sometime next year. This will be a gamechanger because of the multi-modal nature of AI models like ChatGPT. That means the on-device AI will be able to see, hear, and speak to the user as they explore virtual spaces together. This will be further augmented if Apple Intelligence supports Agentic AI, which is capable of autonomously making decisions and taking actions to perform complex tasks on behalf of the user.
In our paper, we brainstormed ways in which AI could be used and abused in the metaverse (Table 4):
| Category | Prediction/Use Cases | Details |
|---|---|---|
| Metaverse Infrastructure | AI/ML integration in the metaverse | AI and machine learning (ML) will play a significant role in analyzing user behavior, powering avatars and characters, and provide real-time interactive experiences in the metaverse. |
| Cyber-Physical Interactions | AI’s role in smart cities and infrastructure | The metaverse will serve as a communication layer for smart city devices, enabling real-time AI-powered interactions between humans and machines. This includes AI-based remote monitoring and control of critical infrastructure like power plants. |
| Privacy and Data Sovereignty | AI-enabled tracking and surveillance | AI systems embedded within AR/VR environments will track user actions, movements, and even physiological data like eye movement. This raises concerns about pervasive tracking and lack of privacy, with AI analyzing patterns to predict behavior. |
| Identity Management and Security | AI-based identity recognition | AI can be used to identify users across different virtual spaces using body movement data or interaction patterns, complicating user anonymity and creating risks associated with identity theft and impersonation. |
| Sentiment Analysis and Manipulation | AI’s role in social engineering | Criminals and state actors can use AI for sentiment analysis to target vulnerable individuals or groups with narratives that manipulate emotions. This will enhance the impact of misinformation and deepen the risks of emotional manipulation. |
| Automated Threat Detection | AI for cyber defense in the metaverse | AI will be essential for monitoring and detecting security threats in real-time by analyzing activities across APIs, devices, and avatars. This includes the ability to identify anomalies in interactions or access patterns. |
| Digital Twins | AI’s role in industrial operations | AI-powered digital twins will allow remote monitoring and control of real-world equipment. Criminals will try to exploit vulnerabilities in these AI-enabled twins to launch cyber-physical attacks against industrial facilities. |
| Avatar-based Social Engineering | AI-generated avatars for manipulation | AI tools can be used to generate avatars that impersonate real people, enabling scams and reputational damage. These avatars could also be used for phishing and other fraudulent activities inside virtual environments. |
| Automation and Smart Contracts | AI-enhanced smart contracts for transactions | AI systems can monitor and enforce smart contracts, ensuring automated transactions between virtual and real-world environments. Malicious actors will try to exploit or manipulate these systems to steal digital assets. |
| Deepfakes and Misinformation | AI-generated deepfakes for misinformation campaigns | AI-generated visual and audio content will become a significant threat in the metaverse, with deepfakes used to manipulate opinions or deceive users. The combination of visual and speech elements amplifies the risks of misinformation. |
| Autonomous Digital Services | AI’s role in providing automated services | AI-powered virtual assistants and bots will operate as service providers, such as virtual doctors or financial advisors. These AI entities can be exploited by criminals to provide false information or conduct fraudulent transactions. |
Table 4. AI uses cases and cybersecurity risks in the metaverse
The eventual introduction of a multi-modal AI model in a powerful headset like the AVP is a big step in the right direction for the future metaverse. Leveraging multi-modal AI capabilities will enable the creation of more immersive and engaging virtual environments. However, this advancement also introduces a range of new challenges, including privacy concerns, identity management issues, and the potential for AI-driven manipulation and cyber-attacks. Striking the right balance between these innovative opportunities and robust protection measures will be essential to safeguard users and preserve the integrity of the metaverse moving forward. Obviously, we are a long way off from seeing many of the use cases and potential threats that we discussed, but expect rapid development in the AI-AR-VR space.
Android XR, an Android operating system designed for XR glasses with integrated Google Gemini, will also be made available this year. Google Gemini offers users real-time interaction by perceiving the environment alongside them and providing answers about their surroundings. This new capability addresses a gap highlighted in our research regarding the AVP, which lacks Apple Intelligence integration despite its M2 processor's capability to support it. With the imminent arrival of Android XR, we anticipate Apple’s eventual release of a visionOS update that will introduce new features and potential attack surfaces that will need to be protected.
While the AVP is an impressive device with a lot of hardware features, it still is a very physically heavy device to wear for prolonged periods of time. AR glasses like the recently announced Meta Orion will be the preferred form factor that will drive mainstream adoption, and Meta also has their own AI model, Llama, that we expect will be incorporated into their glasses. The current AVP almost feels like a first-generation devkit, and visionOS is slowly rolling out new features, so it’s safe to assume a future AVP will have a form factor similar to the Meta Orion AR glasses.
Learn more about our metaverse predictions in our research paper, "Metaverse or Metaworse? Cybersecurity Threats Against the Internet of Experiences."
Like it? Add this infographic to your site:
1. Click on the box below. 2. Press Ctrl+A to select all. 3. Press Ctrl+C to copy. 4. Paste the code into your page (Ctrl+V).
Image will appear the same size as you see above.
- Metaverse or Metaworse? How the Apple Vision Pro Stacks Up Against Predictions
- Understanding Hacktivists: The Overlap of Ideology and Cybercrime
- Across the Span of the Spanish Cybercriminal Underground: Current Activities and Trends
- Bridging Divides, Transcending Borders: The Current State of the English Underground
- Ransomware Spotlight: Ransomhub
Cellular IoT Vulnerabilities: Another Door to Cellular Networks
Today’s Cloud and Container Misconfigurations Are Tomorrow’s Critical Vulnerabilities
Ransomware Spotlight: Ransomhub
AI Assistants in the Future: Security Concerns and Risk Management