Apple has 2x very publicly resisted government demands for user data and campaigned against laws to institute backdoors into their software and services. They’re not perfect by any means but they are by far a lesser evil.
A fully capable Linux phone is the dream, but most people aren’t going to use one. For the majority of people, I would recommend the company that refused to listen to the US and EU about weakening the security of their products over the one with the business model of relying on advertising to you and selling your data.
That’s literally any company though. If you want to legally operate in a certain country, you need to abide by the country’s laws. Sure, pirate FOSS projects could exist. But that’s not the kind of shit that will be sold in retail, because it would literally be illegal to sell.
This is like complaining that Japanese phones can’t disable the camera shutter sound. It’s because Japan regulated the shutter sound, because upskirting was a major issue. So phones legally sold in Japan are required to have the shutter sound permanently set at a high volume, even when the ringer is silenced. That isn’t the phone maker’s fault.
Apple campaigned against regulation like what you’re complaining about. It isn’t Apple’s fault that the regulation was passed anyways.
They just do that for brand optics. Because researchers found the apple privacy settings off/on made no difference to the packet of info sent to apple. Their privacy is a facade.
The issue in one of the cases (San Bernardino) had nothing to do with iCloud data, and everything to do with the data on the device itself. The FBI request was a backdoor into the device. Apple (rightly) refused to add a backdoor to access the phone.
You are referencing data that goes to Apple’s iCloud servers, which Apple was happy to provide because they held the encryption keys. Since then, they have enabled an E2E encryption feature for iCloud data.
I am happy to discuss Apple’s shortcomings, but let’s be clear on which ones we’re discussing
Is this separate from Advanced Data Protection, which is E2E encrypted data on iCloud?
“Don’t track privacy type settings” isn’t very descriptive, so apologies if I’m sounding any way I’m just trying to be clear about what the complaint here is.
And to be clear, is this a privacy concern exclusive to Apple?
Totally unrelated to the E2E, I will have to search for it. It was a year or two ago. Apple claimed turning off the data collection kept your use private to you, but was just a lie, they collected all your data anyway.
And yes, its an IPhone setting not an android setting. Google is another issue.
This should be it , and somewhere I have a podcast feed about all the details
The iPhone Analytics setting makes an explicit promise. Turn it off, and Apple says that it will “disable the sharing of Device Analytics altogether.” However,
While the amount of data gathered is concerning, the type of data is still considered telemetry, which you still agree to have them collect when accepting the terms and conditions of the App Store.
That isn’t to say I’m happy Apple is doing this, but I wanted to start by making that distinction: Apple isn’t “ignoring” your preference to turn off personalized ads, it’s collecting telemetry data which you’ve already given them permission to do when signing up for and using the App Store. The issue with this telemetry data from a privacy perspective is the amount and the fact that it can still be used to identify a user. These are rightly concerning.
It looks like a class-action suit was brought against them for this, and as of September of 2024 a judge trimmed some of the claims, but refused to toss out the suit meaning Apple has to defend themselves. Unfortunately that’s all the information I can find. Do you have anything from after that point? I’m only asking because I don’t and would like to know how it’s going.
Sucks Apple is doing this for sure, but at this point unfortunately it doesn’t seem to violate any existing agreements (would like to see how the class-action progresses to confirm this) and there is still no sign that they’re selling this data or using it to deliver you personalized ads. Pending the results of the suit I’m gonna have to reiterate that even with this, they’re absolutely the lesser evil. But still an evil.
Apple has 2x very publicly resisted government demands for user data and campaigned against laws to institute backdoors into their software and services.
Indeed.
They also immediately folded in China after being given the ultimatum of comply or die.
All it would take is Trump to give the same ultimatum…
Yeah I would expect the same of any company. They have to comply with the laws of the country they do business in. This same requirement compelled them to finally add USB-C to iPhones and allow alternate app stores.
I wouldn’t blame Google for doing the same, so I’m not going to blame Apple for it either. Do you actually expect any company their size to do any different?
To the extent they’re legally able to, Apple has absolutely resisted compromising their device security features to aid law enforcement.
You’re saying the same thing as the top of the thread. All of this is for now. At some point it could be advantageous for Apple to stop resisting US demands. It is important to understand and prepare for that while also accepting, for now, Apple provides the most corporate privacy of the corporate privacy options in the US.
Apple has 2x very publicly resisted government demands for user data and campaigned against laws to institute backdoors into their software and services. They’re not perfect by any means but they are by far a lesser evil.
A fully capable Linux phone is the dream, but most people aren’t going to use one. For the majority of people, I would recommend the company that refused to listen to the US and EU about weakening the security of their products over the one with the business model of relying on advertising to you and selling your data.
And they have proven if the government makes a law requiring access they’ll do it. They have done it for China and Russia.
That’s literally any company though. If you want to legally operate in a certain country, you need to abide by the country’s laws. Sure, pirate FOSS projects could exist. But that’s not the kind of shit that will be sold in retail, because it would literally be illegal to sell.
This is like complaining that Japanese phones can’t disable the camera shutter sound. It’s because Japan regulated the shutter sound, because upskirting was a major issue. So phones legally sold in Japan are required to have the shutter sound permanently set at a high volume, even when the ringer is silenced. That isn’t the phone maker’s fault.
Apple campaigned against regulation like what you’re complaining about. It isn’t Apple’s fault that the regulation was passed anyways.
Well yeah they kinda have to at that point in order to continue conducting business in that country. What about this is specific to Apple?
They just do that for brand optics. Because researchers found the apple privacy settings off/on made no difference to the packet of info sent to apple. Their privacy is a facade.
The issue in one of the cases (San Bernardino) had nothing to do with iCloud data, and everything to do with the data on the device itself. The FBI request was a backdoor into the device. Apple (rightly) refused to add a backdoor to access the phone.
You are referencing data that goes to Apple’s iCloud servers, which Apple was happy to provide because they held the encryption keys. Since then, they have enabled an E2E encryption feature for iCloud data.
I am happy to discuss Apple’s shortcomings, but let’s be clear on which ones we’re discussing
Its the don’t track privacy type settings where you opt out, research found it was a toggle button that did nothing.
They only tout privacy to gain market, they would sell us out for a dollar
Is this separate from Advanced Data Protection, which is E2E encrypted data on iCloud?
“Don’t track privacy type settings” isn’t very descriptive, so apologies if I’m sounding any way I’m just trying to be clear about what the complaint here is.
And to be clear, is this a privacy concern exclusive to Apple?
Totally unrelated to the E2E, I will have to search for it. It was a year or two ago. Apple claimed turning off the data collection kept your use private to you, but was just a lie, they collected all your data anyway.
And yes, its an IPhone setting not an android setting. Google is another issue.
Ok please let me know when you have more information I am very interested to know.
This should be it , and somewhere I have a podcast feed about all the details
https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-analytics-tracking-even-when-off-app-store-1849757558
While the amount of data gathered is concerning, the type of data is still considered telemetry, which you still agree to have them collect when accepting the terms and conditions of the App Store.
That isn’t to say I’m happy Apple is doing this, but I wanted to start by making that distinction: Apple isn’t “ignoring” your preference to turn off personalized ads, it’s collecting telemetry data which you’ve already given them permission to do when signing up for and using the App Store. The issue with this telemetry data from a privacy perspective is the amount and the fact that it can still be used to identify a user. These are rightly concerning.
It looks like a class-action suit was brought against them for this, and as of September of 2024 a judge trimmed some of the claims, but refused to toss out the suit meaning Apple has to defend themselves. Unfortunately that’s all the information I can find. Do you have anything from after that point? I’m only asking because I don’t and would like to know how it’s going.
Sucks Apple is doing this for sure, but at this point unfortunately it doesn’t seem to violate any existing agreements (would like to see how the class-action progresses to confirm this) and there is still no sign that they’re selling this data or using it to deliver you personalized ads. Pending the results of the suit I’m gonna have to reiterate that even with this, they’re absolutely the lesser evil. But still an evil.
Still possible but also still unfounded, so far.
I can believe this. Apple loves to talk big about privacy but their source for it is “trust me bro.”
Was giving literal gold to Donald Trump part of that campaign to save the users?
No that was Tim Apple kissing the ring to minimize tariffs. And it worked.
Indeed.
They also immediately folded in China after being given the ultimatum of comply or die.
All it would take is Trump to give the same ultimatum…
Yeah I would expect the same of any company. They have to comply with the laws of the country they do business in. This same requirement compelled them to finally add USB-C to iPhones and allow alternate app stores.
I wouldn’t blame Google for doing the same, so I’m not going to blame Apple for it either. Do you actually expect any company their size to do any different?
To the extent they’re legally able to, Apple has absolutely resisted compromising their device security features to aid law enforcement.
Good thing Trump’s distracted by gold baubles.
You’re saying the same thing as the top of the thread. All of this is for now. At some point it could be advantageous for Apple to stop resisting US demands. It is important to understand and prepare for that while also accepting, for now, Apple provides the most corporate privacy of the corporate privacy options in the US.
The three of us are in agreement.