14 ms·
I have never seen a company both so technically capable and supportive of user privacy as Apple. It stands completely apart from all of the tech giants of today
by matt_wulfeck 9y ago
I have never seen a company both so technically capable and supportive of user privacy as Apple. It stands completely apart from all of the tech giants of today.
- Prefinem 9y agoThis is the only reason why I moved from Android to iOS even though I enjoy the Android phones and Google Fi more. I wish Google Fi would support iOS devices.
- komali2 9y agoThis change alone is tempting me, and I have been diehard anti-apple for about a decade now for walled-garden reasons. I know, I know, walled garden prevents users from opening their phone to vulnerabilities or guaranteeing a secure experience. I guess I wish I could have my cake and eat it too.
- lern_too_spel 9y agoAndroid has required the user to enter the unlock code to back up the device for years now. This is Apple playing catch-up.
- eridius 9y agoiOS devices have always required the device to "trust" the computer before allowing the backup. Looking at the article, the only real difference now appears to be that you can't just use TouchID, you're forced to use the passcode.
- lern_too_spel 9y agoYou are correct. Android does not require you to enter a passcode to trust a computer if you have a fingerprint registered. The change is that Apple now requires you to enter a passcode if you have set up a passcode on the device in the past. If you haven't, the attack vector still exists, and if you are traveling with a trusted laptop with fingerprint unlock, the attack vector still exists with one level of indirection.
- nemothekid 9y ago>If you haven't, the attack vector still exists, and if you are traveling with a trusted laptop with fingerprint unlock, the attack vector still exists with one level of indirection. You can't setup TouchID without a passcode. The "attack vector" only exists if you 0 security on your iPhone to begin with. (So , yes, technically the attack vector exists if you choose to use no locks at all).
- 9935c101ab17a66 9y agoYou misunderstand. The vector is: I take random persons phone, compel them to provide me their finger print, and now when I plug the phone in to a computer, I can unlock the device and then tap "trust" in order to back up the phone to the computer. If the iPhone was already powered on and the user had entered their passcode after it turned on, even if it was two weeks ago (there may be a time out I'm not aware of, but you get the point), I'd be able to backup their device to my computer.
- matt_wulfeck 9y agoThat's changed now, from the article: > Under iOS 11, this sequence has changed to also specifically require the passcode on the device after the "Trust This Computer?" prompt.
- comex 9y ago> Looking at the article, the only real difference now appears to be that you can't just use TouchID, you're forced to use the passcode. That's part of it. Another part is that the passcode has to be entered after the device has been connected to the computer, as opposed to starting with an unlocked phone (maybe you took it while it was in use, maybe you forced the user to unlock it) and connecting it to a computer later.
- jaclaz 9y agoI am not sure to understand. Once the device is unlocked, what is the obstacle to change the passcode? Needing the old one? Or - if you prefer - what happens if you have a TouchID and forget the passcode? Do you need to reset the phone?
- code_duck 9y agoNot always... just since iOS 7.
- ReverseCold 9y agoAndroid = Google (No, aosp is unusable, and Google is working to make it more unusable). Google = no privacy Therefore, Android = no privacy Q.E.D
- lern_too_spel 9y agoWhat data does Google collect that Apple doesn't collect? The only difference I can see is that Google is competent at making the data it collects useful to the user and barely usable to advertisers. Your comment looks like trolling. We were discussing a feature to prevent others from backing up your device.
- adventured 9y agoIn the first part, you're setting up a premise that nobody here can or will answer publicly even if they have the knowledge of the exact information collected by either company. That gives you a free run at the second part without anything supporting it.
- lern_too_spel 9y agoThe information they collect is in their OSes' respective privacy policies. I've looked at them. They are pretty much exactly the same.
- LeoNatan25 9y agoYou must have looked at the privacy policies but not read them.
- lern_too_spel 9y agoYou and GGP are the ones making ridiculous claims without evidence (that the data the OSes collect are unknowable instead of outlined in a privacy policy and that Android collects more data than iOS out of the box).
- seanp2k2 9y agoHow hard is it to jailbreak with ADB shell and get root on a random phone? Does that always require a code?
- vurpo 9y agoIt depends on the device, but at least on Nexus/Pixel devices you can just plug the phone in and `fastboot oem unlock` and it will unlock the bootloader, i.e. allow you to flash anything onto it that you want.
- lern_too_spel 9y agoThis does not let you access the user's data because fastboot oem unlock wipes the data partition. Before you can unlock the bootloader, you have to enable the option in the developer menu, which requires the phone's owner's account's unlock code.
- on_and_off 9y agonot sure why there are massive downvotes AFAIK this is true
- madeofpalk 9y ago> I wish Google Fi would support iOS devices. I'm curious - how can a carrier support and not support certain networks? Isn't that like saying I wish my ISP supported Linux?
- Prefinem 9y agoGoogle Fi only allows Their Nexus and Pixel phones on their network. It is like an ISP seeing that you are running Linux and not letting your traffic through, just a bit more complicated than that. (SIM Card, Modems, Frequencies)
- fooey 9y agoYou can pop a tmobile SIM in the phone and they partially work, but Google Fi requires hardware support in the radio to work fully It's not that they're blocking iOS, but more that iPhones don't support the network.
- Prefinem 9y agoUnderstood. Just wish they would both get on board with it.
- Dylan16807 9y agoNot quite. You need those phones to activate service but you can move that sim into other phones later. Once you have service you can also get data-only sims that openly support all devices.
- QAPereo 9y agoLargely the same here, I'm giving up on Windows too, and I've been using MS OS' since DOS. I'll pay a premium to keep my data secure.
- LeoNatan25 9y agoAll other tech giants today make money from advertisement and /or “big” data, which are inherently anti-privacy. This is why Microsoft has done 180° on privacy and has filled their first part apps with ads.
- bobsil1 9y agoMS was always in bed with the feds, e.g. Skype and crypto backdoors.
- LeoNatan25 9y agoHistorically, Microsoft has made a lot of money from government institutions being locked-in to their software, so that makes perfect sense.
- StavrosK 9y agoThat is very true, but I find it very sad that, as much as Apple is pro-privacy, it's very anti-freedom. I'd love to switch to a device as private as an iPhone, but at this point you're just renting the device from them.
- dkonofalski 9y agoIt's not anti-freedom. It's just pro-ease-of-use and it's easier to guarantee a quality experience when there are less unknowns and less variables to account for. When everyone is using the same device with the same software, it's much easier to guarantee a great experience.
- steve19 9y agoAllowing side loading of apps would not impact usability in anyway. Edit: It would massively increase the usability, allowing any apps to be installed, not just Apple approved apps, making the phone more usable to many people. Back in the day I had to buy a dev account just to load an emulator I wanted to use (it was open source) without rooting.
- dkonofalski 9y agoThat is objectively untrue. Every system that has allowed sideloading of apps has been compromised by that very feature.
- StavrosK 9y ago"Every society that has been allowed to drive cars has had car accidents." I know the risks, I want to do it anyway. I don't want a nanny over my head.
- braythwayt 9y agoThat may be a better analogy than you intend. The problem with cars is that everyone suffers the consequences of your driving. In fact, you may have the least exposure to the carbon monoxide, pollution, or even accident risk. Pedestrians, cyclists, property owners, and other drivers are all at risk of your driving. For that reason, societies tightly regulate car ownership and driving. More so than phones: I don’t need a license to use a phone, nor do I have to register my ownership or have it regularly inspected. But technology these days has this same characteristic: Others bear the costs of your decision. Every device connected to the internet is a DDOS vector. I don’t want you deciding whether to keep your device up to date with the latest security patches, because if you (and a few million others) don’t, GitHub is down for me.
- secfirstmd 9y agoWhat about Open Whisper Systems?
- gabeio 9y agoI like Open Whipser Systems also but do they really qualify as a tech giant?
- biftek 9y agoIt's great. They essentially have a monopoly on providing privacy, which is and will continue to be a bigger competitive advantage.
- foolfoolz 9y agototally agree. i think designing software so you dont have access to customer data (zero knowledge or customer held keys) will eventually be a big selling point for SaaS companies
- scotu 9y agoThe first time I saw the concept (and got mind blown by it) was when I discovered the original version of Passpack (online password manager) made by @sullof
- tomschlick 9y agoAlso for governments themselves.
- mixmastamyk 9y agoAny posts you'd recommend?
- djtriptych 9y agoI thought the same thing reading this title and it makes me want to invest. Companies who ignore user privacy are in for a hit I think, in the wake of equifax. I'd support companies with excellent privacy / data security records being exclusive brokers of my information. Apple is on that very short list.
- 2bitencryption 9y ago> Companies who ignore user privacy are in for a hit I think, in the wake of equifax. Are they? Do people care that much? I think, except for those who actually have their credit stolen, the average person just sees it as another headline of the world today, and will move on, the way people still fly United.
- milkytron 9y ago> the average person just sees it as another headline of the world today, and will move on, the way people still fly United. Until people's lives are actually impacted by the lack of privacy, they'll continue doing what they always do. Once something requires action on the person's part, (either credit being stolen from them, or something along those lines) most people won't take preemptive actions. And this would need to happen on a massive scale for giant corporations to change their ways.
- simonh 9y agoI don't entirely agree. Pre-emptive action could be a 5% higher chance of buying an iPhone, or a bump in existing iPhone user's stickiness to the platform (you value keeping something you have more than not getting something you don't). That's enough to make a significant difference. Other than financial data I don't particularly value my privacy. I post on many online forums under my own name and even my alias here is a composition of elements of my name. I use Google services quite happily and have no material gripes with the company. But still as an iPhone user it's good to know that Apple has my back on this and I'd really hate to lose that feeling. Also I don't think this is entirely a commercial decision on Apple's part. They must know very well that taking an absolute stance on customer privacy puts them diametrically at odds with the interests of the Chinese government. China hasn't taken many overt steps against them (though they shut down iTunes movies and iBooks and chipping away at Apple Pay and other services with onerous regulations), but does anyone really doubt that they're working away in the background to try to help Apple's competitors and slow down Apple sales and service expansion in China? There's no way the Chinese government can be happy with Apple's privacy stance and nunlike int he West Apple doesn't have the shield of the law to protect them in China. They stand naked against the Chinese government, but they're still doing it. That takes some real conviction. I really don't think I'm exaggerating in saying that this stance on privacy may very well cost them any chance of a dominant position in the Chinese market. It's certainly running a real material risk of that anyway.
- karatinsa 9y agoI just wish an Apple ID wasn't required for everything. Especially one that requires giving them my full name, phone, and physical address. I understand that it would be needed for purchase apps, but just to download a free one?
- bluthru 9y agoYeah, I really hope something like Gatekeeper comes to iOS. As time moves on (and tech companies stop being apolitical), I'd like to not have the App Store being the only way to get software only my device. For example Gab was rejected by the App Store because of the content people were posting. Of course, they won't ban Chrome despite being susceptible to the same content violation.
- krrrh 9y agoIs it not still possible to set up an AppleID with gift cards you paid cash for? As far as I know it used to be. I still have an AppleID I set up in another country using a free iTunes download code I got from a bottle of soda iirc, never used a credit card and downloaded a free apps that weren't available in the country of my main AppleID.
- pishpash 9y agoI choose to read this as sarcasm, but the fruit fandom here doesn't seem to think so. I'll trust Google's engineering prowess and rigor before I trust Apple, who couldn't even bother to verify emails before leaking Apple ID attributes towards that email, and who allowed things to "fappen." But I'll trust none of them to "guard my privates." Please.
- warent 9y agoIt sounds an awful lot like you've had an embarrassing personal experience and are blaming Apple
- paulddraper 9y agoThere's the iTunes hack, the SSL bug. Apples security record is not better than say, Adobe
- krrrh 9y agoYou are reminding people of serious security issues, but comparing them to Adobe? That's going too far. Personally I dropped a lot of Google products with the Snowden leaks revealed to shocked Google engineers that they shouldn't have been sending unencrypted traffic between data centers and assuming it was safe because it was on leased lines. There's bugs, and then there's just negligence.
- avaer 9y agoI agree. But it's merely the consequence of them being a tech giant whose product is not their user's privacy.
- aeontech 9y agoThere is no “merely” about it when it is a conscious choice to pursue this business model.
- yuhong 9y agoThinking about it, Apple is benefiting right now from the same debt-based economy that benefits the FBI/NSA. I don't think there even is much local US manufacturing, so Apple imports products made in China and sell them at a high profit margin. Apple's cash piles came from debt, and I think national debt is exactly the thing that increases when FBI/NSA spends more money, right? (Of course, it is only one kind of debt, but it is important for example because of the bonds other countries buy with their FX reserves)
- nindalf 9y agoI think you've confused several different trends with each other. I can't see a coherent point here.
- benevol 9y agoApple is a partner of the NSA's PRISM program. We know that since Snowden, if you remember those revelations.
- themihai 9y agoYeah but what choice do you have? Apple is the lesser evil here.
- remcob 9y agoYou can choose non-US companies. OnePlus, Samsung, etc. I don't think China or S.Korea is less inclined to spy on you, but I suspect they are less competent at it.
- glogla 9y agoBut then you end up with Google. It doesn't matter who builds the hardware, if it runs Google's system. Is Apple good? Probably not. Is it less of a threat to your privacy and freedom than Google? Probably.
- remcob 9y agoThis is where I would mention that I'm running Cyanogemod, rooted of course, with Protect My Privacy (PMP) installed. http://www.android.protectmyprivacy.org/ http://www.android.protectmyprivacy.org/ While I really like non-Google Android + PMP in theory, the reality is that this solution is extremely complicated, limiting, error prone, buggy and probably not worth it. So I concede that Apple is the better choice, but nevertheless, persist in my futile efforts to make my 1+ somehow work securely.
- taneq 9y agoHow dies PMP differ from PrivacyGuard? From the description it sounds the same.
- 9y ago
- jowiar 9y agoAll the other tech giants are in the business of selling your data to advertisers. Apple is in the business of selling their stuff to you.
- Vinnl 9y agoMozilla comes to mind.
- on_and_off 9y agoI would have loved to see FirefoxOS be a real thing. Unlike any of the tech giants, they have no incentive to pull you in their ecosystem, embrace open source, etc If only FirefoxOS had arrived earlier and was not tied to a catastrophic 'web on mobile' idea.
- creatonez 9y agoSo the fact that they've previously been lying about device encryption stands out as supportive of user privacy to you?