32 ms·

Forget iPhone X–Apple's Best Product Is Its Privacy Stance

219 points by colinprince 9y ago

andreareina 9y ago
The iPhone is unbelievably fragile, before you look at the high price. Apple bends over backwards to deny the existence of design flaws, to the point of blaming users for doing it wrong. Despite this I am seriously considering an iPhone, their stance on privacy is the only reason.
- r3bl 9y ago
  I couldn't agree more. The only reason I would consider getting an iPhone too is Apple's privacy stance. They seem like the only company in the big five (Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Microsoft) that don't seem to be that interested in my data. They just want to sell me the product, and that product is, in essence, a piece of hardware.
  - rSi 9y ago
    I don't get why people believe that Apple is so much better than any of the other big ones.. http://www.businessinsider.com/uber-iphone-app-secret-access-sensitive-apple-features-2017-10 http://www.businessinsider.com/uber-iphone-app-secret-access... Apple always refuses to comment on bugs, security holes and basically anything they can not use for marketing. You WANT to believe that Apple is better.
    - skrowl 9y ago
      I clicked on this to see why too. My understanding is that they were just as anti-privacy as Google or Samsung. They signed on to PRISM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program) , they happily work with the government over user privacy in articles all the time, and those are just the things we know about. I'm sure there are more PRISM-like back room government deals that we haven't heard of out there, and I haven't seen anything that would make me believe that Apple wouldn't sign on to them.
      - m-p-3 9y ago
        IMO it's just a PR stance to make them stand out from the rest.
      - tcfunk 9y ago
        Is this related to Purism announcing that they had successfully disabled the Intel Management Engine on their laptops? Or is that unrelated? Sorry, this is all new info to me.
        wolfgke 9y ago
        > Is this related to Purism announcing that they had successfully disabled the Intel Management Engine on their laptops? Or is that unrelated? It is completely unrelated. Intel ME is about a remote servicing interface that exists on all current Intel processors. While it has some usages for managing computers in a corporate setting or managing servers (keyword to look for: Intel Active Management Technology (Intel AMT), which needs Intel vPro), it exists on nearly all current Intel processors (except, I think, Intel, Quark; but this processor is built for completely different purposes). Thus there are rumors that it is a backdoor for, say, 3-letter agencies. I don't want to spread any rumors here, but just say: Because Intel ME is very large and complicated (according to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iffTJ1vPCSo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iffTJ1vPCSo 5 MB in size) it is a real concern that lots of security gaps will be found (and some have been found in the past), which, because of Intel ME's structure (according to https://schd.ws/hosted_files/osseu17/84/Replace%20UEFI%20with%20Linux.pdf https://schd.ws/hosted_files/osseu17/84/Replace%20UEFI%20wit... it runs on ring -3) can easily lead to really dangerous security holes. Just for this reason alone any responsible admin should try to disable Intel ME so that this security liability does not have to stay open. PRISM is a surveillance program by the NSA.
    - agumonkey 9y ago
      how hard would it be for a bunch of semiconductor / cpu designers / cs students to team up and release a nice open hardware so that we can forget about PRISM and the likes ?
      - tonysdg 9y ago
        That's the whole idea behind the RISC-V platform [1]. It's well-funded, well-designed, has amazing pedigree (David Patterson literally wrote the book on computer architecture). It's even licensed such that companies can use it in proprietary designs. And yet, making the actual switch is a tremendously difficult task. On the software side alone, it requires recompiling every application you want to run on your platform. That doesn't even touch the cost of rolling the actual hardware. There are more than a few examples of this: Intel's Itanium, Oracle's SPARC, Berkeley's MIPS, Transmeta's Crusoe, etc. Sure, these all had niches (embedded systems, research hardware, a few high-end servers) -- but breaking out into the mainstream (a.k.a. like x86-64 and ARM/ARM64) is damn near impossible. [1] https://riscv.org/ https://riscv.org/
        agumonkey 9y ago
        I heard that so far riscv chips (a few were taped IIRC) were just too slow. I deeply believe that with simple and open silicon (cpu, gpu) you'd get a huge amount of visible benefits for end users that don't require Apple A10 levels of performance. - Less bugs - Potentially better applications since the lower layers are stable and don't require you to fight it (as an example, pre vulkan drivers were hell, linux software has to circle around that)
        terlisimo 9y ago
        This would be a bit different. Itanium, Sparc, Crusoe, ARM... all these CPUs were offering is the promise of better performance in some aspect. Nobody expects RISC-V to beat i7 or Ryzen in any benchmarks. IMO its purpose is to be the in hardware what GNU/Linux was in software. edit: GNU/Linux, not just Linux :)
        wolfgke 9y ago
    - fhood 9y ago
      No, from a security stand point I can feel pretty confidant that Apple is better so long as iOS 0days are still selling for 10x that of their counterparts.
- mcphage 9y ago
  > Despite this I am seriously considering an iPhone, their stance on privacy is the only reason. That's definitely a great reason to get one. A nice bonus you'll find, once you do, is that they're nowhere near as fragile as you fear.
  - seba_dos1 9y ago
    Nor as private as you wish.
    - 0xJRS 9y ago
      As someone who does own an iPhone i'm genuinely curious what your largest concerns are about its privacy
      - hellcow 9y ago
        Apple's documented history of working with the NSA to undermine the privacy of its users: PRISM. Tim Cook struck that deal with the NSA and remains CEO today.
        astral303 9y ago
        It is not true that Tim Cook struck a deal with the NSA. Nor is it true that Apple has worked with the NSA for PRISM. NSA likely exploited the SSL vulnerability in iOS 6.0 (released Sept 2012, NSA added Apple Oct 2012) and got access to snoop on Apple's data. After pulling the phrase "participate knowingly" out of thin air, Washington Post was forced to walk back that statement: "Hours after the news broke, and every company bar PalTalk and AOL denied any knowledge of the program and allegations of their involvement, the Post has changed its stance. The phrase “participate knowingly” has been removed from the article, a new passage suggests the firms were unaware of PRISM" https://thenextweb.com/us/2013/06/07/wapost-backtracks-on-claim-tech-companies-participate-knowingly-in-prism-data-collection/ https://thenextweb.com/us/2013/06/07/wapost-backtracks-on-cl...
        9y ago
- CaptSpify 9y ago
  The only real reason I haven't switched is because they won't give me control of my phone. At least with Android I can root it, install custom roms, and mess with pretty much any non-google software that I have on there. Android is far from perfect, and I still hate it, but at least I can still control most of it.
  - nyolfen 9y ago
    > At least with Android I can root it, and not just you :P
  - GeekyBear 9y ago
    The iOS equivalent of rooting your device is called a jailbreak. >Jailbreaking permits root access to iOS, allowing the downloading and installation of additional applications, extensions, and themes that are unavailable through the official Apple App Store. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ios_jailbreak https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ios_jailbreak
- spike021 9y ago
  The iPhone is unbelievably fragile, before you look at the high price. Apple bends over backwards to deny the existence of design flaws, to the point of blaming users for doing it wrong. I'd say I _mostly_ disagree. Many times over the years there have been "major" problems (i.e. antenna-gate and bendgate to name a couple). I've never experienced those issues, and I'm sure neither have many others. The iPhones through the years have been mostly solid for me in terms of hardware without significant design flaws. Now, I don't try to claim iPhones are perfect, but I think this is an over-reaction.
  - andreareina 9y ago
    Anecdotally (but with n = many), I see many more scratched/broken iPhone screens than premium Android. Similar prices, same peer group. There are probably other sources of selection bias I'm not seeing, but it's a large enough effect that I'm cautiously positive of my determination absent an actual survey. It took two years for Apple to acknowledge[1] that #staingate was a real issue. I do think their hardware is generally high quality, but there are holes, and they are magnified by their positioning as a premium brand and certain high-profile denials of said holes. Which for a brand that lives and dies on its reputation seems less than smart. Adding to the weirdness is that I've alternately received excellent support in cases of hardware issues, and next to none. My guess is that the frontline has a whitelist of issues that they can okay, and have no little latitude beyond that. [1]: https://www.macrumors.com/2017/02/24/apple-extended-anti-reflective-repair-program/ https://www.macrumors.com/2017/02/24/apple-extended-anti-ref...
    - rconti 9y ago
      Anecdotally, I just never see cracked screens on phones anymore. Only data I could find, but very, very old (only covers to iphone 4(!!) https://www.squaretrade.com/cell-phone-comparison-study-nov-10 https://www.squaretrade.com/cell-phone-comparison-study-nov-...
- rconti 9y ago
  They're certainly fragile, but I don't believe they're any more fragile than other major flagship phones.
  - andreareina 9y ago
    I'll quote my reply[1] to 'spike021 > Anecdotally (but with n = many), I see many more scratched/broken iPhone screens than premium Android. Similar prices, same peer group. There are probably other sources of selection bias I'm not seeing, but it's a large enough effect that I'm cautiously positive of my determination absent an actual survey. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15607637 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15607637
- fermienrico 9y ago
  > The iPhone is unbelievable fragile. This is such a handwavy statement. Fragile, compared to the competition? Can you point out any objective measure that supports "Unbelievably" fragile? All modern phones are fragile. Some slightly more than others.
  - CaptSpify 9y ago
    Just because a lot of other people on the market make fragile phones doesn't change the fact the that the iPhone is also fragile.
  - andreareina 9y ago
    I'll quote my reply[1] to 'spike021 > Anecdotally (but with n = many), I see many more scratched/broken iPhone screens than premium Android. Similar prices, same peer group. There are probably other sources of selection bias I'm not seeing, but it's a large enough effect that I'm cautiously positive of my determination absent an actual survey. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15607637 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15607637
frankmcsherry 9y ago
> Wired recently deployed a team of experts to deconstruct Apple’s code and found its differential privacy practices to be lacking, a characterization that the company strongly disputes. If by "deployed" they mean "interviewed about their work". I don't understand Time crediting Wired with the research[0], which does a disservice to their actual sources of funding. https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.02753 https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.02753
away2017throw 9y ago
It helps when you don't have an ads business branch.
- EADGBE 9y ago
  (yet)
  - helb 9y ago
    more like (anymore): https://developer.apple.com/support/iad/ https://developer.apple.com/support/iad/
- Mindwipe 9y ago
  Apple did until last year though.
  - pwinnski 9y ago
    ...which failed due to their strict privacy rules making the ads less effective than advertisers wanted.
dingaling 9y ago
Apple itself may well have a pro-privacy stance regarding the data associated with their products & services, but if I can't even install a firewall on one of their phones then that doesn't protect my privacy much against malicious or deceptive third-parties. I don't much like Android as a system but at least I can strip it of Google services and install a firewall and feel reasonably private. It's not an ideal option but it works.
- BillinghamJ 9y ago
  It does have a firewall. The configuration is static: no incoming connections. You might be thinking about not being able to have an antivirus? In which case, that is certainly a feature - not a bug. Allowing the privileges required to enable an AV to operate on iOS would severely degrade the security of your device. The losses would massively outweigh any potential benefits of having an AV.
  - 45h34jh53k4j 9y ago
    I ran an outgoing firewall on ios from about ios5 to ios8 (FirewallIP -- jb only). I lament every day since ios9 (and not jailbreaking) about its loss. Its a killer feature that apple should implement. Many apps connects back frequently -- sometimes every action I take. Enough!
  - Yetanfou 9y ago
    Blocking incoming connections on a mobile device is less important than blocking outgoing connections given the threat model of a multitude of mobile devices running basically black-box applications which have access to a range of sensors. The main threat here is applications gathering data - of any sort, from positional to audiovisual to network traffic to (financial) transactional - and sending it off to their masters. The threat is, so to say, inside the walls already, not outside. The task it to make sure it does not communicate to the outside world. iOS does not allow fine-grained control over outgoing network access. The assumption is that the user trusts the application to not do anything untoward, after all it was vetted by Apple before it appeared in the store. There are ways to get this type of control on iOS but since the first step you need to take is to 'jailbreak' the device this is not a real solution. Android does allow this type of control through a multitude of firewall (i.e. Linux iptables) configuration applications. Android devices running version 3.x or earlier need to be 'rooted' to gain access to the firewall configuration, later versions (from 4.0) don't require rooting. The 'no-root' firewall works by routing all traffic through an on-device VPN (which can be instantiated without root access as of Android 4.0). This does mean the firewall application gets access to all network traffic, making that type of application a good target for those who wish to subvert Android network security.
thisisit 9y ago
This might as well be titled - Forget Iphone X-Apple's Best Product is that they are not out to sell you anything else - ads (Google) or other products (Amazon). If a stance on something is due not having a particular type of business, is it really worth the praise?
- fredleblanc 9y ago
  But it's chicken and egg, right? They don't have that particular business because they made the choice of privacy long ago? Even if they're not in the ads business because of a series of lucky decisions that just happened to steer them this way, there's nothing wrong with touting a selling point.
  - adamlett 9y ago
    No. Apple has had the same business model always, which is to sell you hardware differentiated by software at a premium. Apple doesn't have an advertising-based business model[1] because such a model is fundamentally incompatible with their existing business model. The reason is that for an advertising based model to be truly successful, you have to reach as many consumers as possible, which ultimately means that your product must be free to use for consumers. Apple's stance on privacy is making a virtue out of necessity. [1] Yes, yes, I know: iAd. But how well did that work?
    - 013a 9y ago
      I think its more complicated than that. There are reports that Apple has an internal committee, including a high level executive, dubbed their "privacy czars" which are required to unanimously sign off on any instance of user data collection, and this committee has actively limited products like Siri over concerns [1] There's also the San Bernadino customer letter, which has become a defining point in their privacy history [2]. They didn't have to publish that letter; they could have fought it privately or not fought it. There's really no fundamental reason why iAd couldn't have become a more powerful revenue generating part of their platform. They sell enough iPhones to reach a broad market. But, per [1], reports say that the team ran into internal privacy concerns which constantly forced limiting its capabilities. Apple is fundamentally different, in ways that can't solely be explained by their product history and revenue sources. Companies like HP and Samsung make consumer hardware, but also generate revenue by selling their customers' data to third parties. Its clear to me that Apple does consider Privacy a revenue-generating product that they sell. Of course, you can argue that maybe they wouldn't take that stance if they weren't so successful in hardware; that Privacy is a privilege afforded to them because of their success, and less successful companies need that advertising revenue. But now we're arguing hypotheticals, and I'm not going to partake in that. [1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-encryption-privacy-insight/apple-privacy-czars-grapple-with-internal-conflicts-over-user-data-idUSKCN0WN0BO https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-encryption-privacy-... [2] https://www.apple.com/customer-letter/ https://www.apple.com/customer-letter/
khana 9y ago
You got that right.
TazeTSchnitzel 9y ago
From what I've heard from a friend who works for Apple, it's more than skin-deep, they have a strict internal culture of user privacy. It's difficult to get permission to report any kind of user data or to bypass the sandbox, for example.
- damnyou 9y ago
  This is true of all large corps. Accessing user data without a really good reason will get you walked out the door instantly.
  - TazeTSchnitzel 9y ago
    I don't mean accessing data on their servers, but rather analytics and the like. They don't get shader content in their crash reports because it might have been generated from user data somehow.
singularity2001 9y ago
Would this be a fair assessment: ? Facebook, Microsoft and Google collect all your private information and share it with themselves, the government and some with the advertisement industry. Apple collects some of your private information and is forced to share it with themselves, Nuance and the government (subvertly see snowden and interpolate). Amazon is in a special position.
- criddell 9y ago
  > some with the advertisement industry I'm always interested when people say this. Say I want to buy some person's data. Is there a way I can do that with Facebook, Microsoft, or Google?
  - MBCook 9y ago
    No, because it’s far too valuable to them. If they sold it it wouldn’t be valuable for long. They do it ‘the other way’. You say “I want to buy some eyeballs like X” and they sell you access to the eyeballs. But they don’t give you the person’s information.
    - criddell 9y ago
      That's what I thought. So my private information isn't really shared with anybody, is it? I mean I guess if I were to place an ad targeted to black men that speak french and you answered it, I would learn that about you.
      - MBCook 9y ago
        It’s shared with anyone inside facebook who want to use it for something. I’ve never gotten the impression there are strong internal privacy controls. External companies? Perhaps if they partner with Facebook but not normal ad buyers.
        praneshp 9y ago
sgift 9y ago
Reading about all of this is so surreal for me as a German. I read about these "great" policy and all I can think is ... "so, they do the minimum required" .. what's there to praise? Then I remember how US (companies) tend to think about privacy and get very sad. Stronger penalties for anyone breaking relevant privacy rules cannot come fast enough.
- kobeya 9y ago
  Europe may have strong laws regarding privacy. Those laws don’t apply to government requests. That’s a difference.
  - sgift 9y ago
    Germanys data protection laws bind the government too. The government cannot request any data they like without a valid reason (though still too much in my opinion).
    - jandrese 9y ago
      There are a lot of checks in the US that require a "valid reason", but in the end the people granting those requests tend to rubber stamp everything that goes across their desk, and the only rejections are for people who make errors on the request form. It might stop a really egregious violation (spying on political rivals for example), but for general public the protection is pretty weak.
- MBCook 9y ago
  In everything that keeps happening in the US with regard to leaks and advertisers watching you and Facebook profiling you... I’m not sure it’s fixable. Until a large chunk of congress, and probably the R chunk due to their privacy law stance, gets a TON of embarrassing stuff leaked to the public or better yet ‘shared’ when they weren’t expecting it... I don’t think anything will change. We won’t get real laws to protect people. And a decent sized part of me says not even incidents like that would do it. It would just be blame-the-victim and you-accepted-that-policy and the laws wouldn’t really change.
exitreturn123 9y ago
I work closely with Apple so need to post anonymously. I believed everything in this until something that happened in late July this past summer. In China, their fastest-growing market, China demanded all secure messaging and VPN apps be removed from the App Store and Apple complied.[1] So privacy matters, unless it's in your fastest-growing market. I intend to discuss with Tim next time I see him. 1: https://techcrunch.com/2017/07/29/apple-removes-vpn-apps-from-the-app-store-in-china/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/07/29/apple-removes-vpn-apps-fro...
- jonknee 9y ago
  What is the correct move? Refuse to follow the law and withdraw from the market completely? How about when Apple removed apps from developers based in Iran because of US sanctions? https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/24/technology/apple-iran.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/24/technology/apple-iran.htm...
  - freehunter 9y ago
    >Refuse to follow the law and withdraw from the market completely? Your tone of voice seems to indicate you don't think that's actually an option.
    - MBCook 9y ago
      You can’t do that. It’s China. It’s one of the largest markets on Earth and Apple is a public company. Cook would immediately be fired by the board. They’d put someone new in, and that someone new would comply with China’s demand. And no one would be better off. As Cook says at least Apple does the best they can and holds the line on other things like encrypting iMessage.
      - chimeracoder 9y ago
        > You can’t do that. It’s China. It’s one of the largest markets on Earth and Apple is a public company. Cook would immediately be fired by the board. They’d put someone new in, and that someone new would comply with China’s demand. Somehow, that didn't happen when Google effectively withdrew from China.
jclay 9y ago
Apple's position on privacy also led me to switch to iCloud recently. I migrated my mail and drive to iCloud (from GMail, Google Drive) for this very reason and while there isn't always a 1-1 feature parity, I prefer to know that my data won't be used to analyze and categorize me for the purpose of advertising.
- kobeya 9y ago
  How did you do this without changing your email address?
  - jclay 9y ago
    There's not a great way unfortunately. I just switched all of my accounts that send transactional emails (Amazon receipts, Uber, etc) over to iCloud and then forwarded my old Gmail. There's no turn-key method I'm aware of, but It was important to me that I could have my purchase and trip logs stored somewhere that respects my privacy.
- ProAm 9y ago
  iCloud isnt safe though [1] [1] https://www.popsci.com/apple-cares-about-your-privacy-unless-you-use-icloud https://www.popsci.com/apple-cares-about-your-privacy-unless...
- duality 9y ago
  What makes you claim (implicitly) that Google, Dropbox, etc. are selling data from your email or storage accounts?
  - jclay 9y ago
    I suppose I should clarify that I'm referring to the data being used to classify me into various (increasingly specific) categories and that resulting output being sold to the highest bidder in the form of a targeted advertisement. Dropbox I'm less familiar with, so I can't speak to their model.
karpodiem 9y ago
fun little incident this morning - with my wifi off, I logged into iCloud.com to change my primary AppleID e-mail address from an .edu to icloud.com address (https://www.macrumors.com/2017/10/31/apple-id-third-party-email-address-update/ https://www.macrumors.com/2017/10/31/apple-id-third-party-em... Interesting location identification for the request origination - https://www.dropbox.com/s/v9rtg1igl73gf67/where.png?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/v9rtg1igl73gf67/where.png?dl=0 Now, I've seen 2FA requests a couple hundred miles off, but this is _way_ off. I'm in the suburbs of metropolitan Detroit. For a lark, I googled 'NSA Texas' - https://goo.gl/maps/rb1AhG3EiE62 https://goo.gl/maps/rb1AhG3EiE62 Hello NSA! You might want to review the process on that one.
- matthewmacleod 9y ago
  Or in actuality, it’s just sloppy IP geolocation.
  - astral303 9y ago
    Indeed, Occam's razor says poor IP geolocation. What are the chances that you are being monitored by NSA from Texas, or that the geolocation database is stale or wrong?
    - frickinLasers 9y ago
      Out of curiosity, what are the chances this geolocation error also exists 170 miles away? I had the exact same thing happen a few weeks ago, from just east of Chicago.
lefstathiou 9y ago
I’m a big fan of this - want to point out that the motivation behind this is as much economic as it is philosophical. Apple’s stance on privacy is 100% in their economic interest because it negatively impacts Google, Facebook and Amazon’s data-driven business models without Apple looking like a bad actor in the ecosystem. These companies are its biggest threats in software and it puts moats around Apple’s hardware business
rallycarre 9y ago
lol....

219 points by colinprince 9y ago

The iPhone is unbelievably fragile, before you look at the high price. Apple bends over backwards to deny the existence of design flaws, to the point of blaming users for doing it wrong. Despite this I am seriously considering an iPhone, their stance on privacy is the only reason.

r3bl 9y ago
I couldn't agree more. The only reason I would consider getting an iPhone too is Apple's privacy stance. They seem like the only company in the big five (Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Microsoft) that don't seem to be that interested in my data. They just want to sell me the product, and that product is, in essence, a piece of hardware.
- rSi 9y ago
  I don't get why people believe that Apple is so much better than any of the other big ones.. http://www.businessinsider.com/uber-iphone-app-secret-access-sensitive-apple-features-2017-10 http://www.businessinsider.com/uber-iphone-app-secret-access... Apple always refuses to comment on bugs, security holes and basically anything they can not use for marketing. You WANT to believe that Apple is better.
  - skrowl 9y ago
    I clicked on this to see why too. My understanding is that they were just as anti-privacy as Google or Samsung. They signed on to PRISM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program) , they happily work with the government over user privacy in articles all the time, and those are just the things we know about. I'm sure there are more PRISM-like back room government deals that we haven't heard of out there, and I haven't seen anything that would make me believe that Apple wouldn't sign on to them.
    - m-p-3 9y ago
      IMO it's just a PR stance to make them stand out from the rest.
    - tcfunk 9y ago
      Is this related to Purism announcing that they had successfully disabled the Intel Management Engine on their laptops? Or is that unrelated? Sorry, this is all new info to me.
      - wolfgke 9y ago
        > Is this related to Purism announcing that they had successfully disabled the Intel Management Engine on their laptops? Or is that unrelated? It is completely unrelated. Intel ME is about a remote servicing interface that exists on all current Intel processors. While it has some usages for managing computers in a corporate setting or managing servers (keyword to look for: Intel Active Management Technology (Intel AMT), which needs Intel vPro), it exists on nearly all current Intel processors (except, I think, Intel, Quark; but this processor is built for completely different purposes). Thus there are rumors that it is a backdoor for, say, 3-letter agencies. I don't want to spread any rumors here, but just say: Because Intel ME is very large and complicated (according to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iffTJ1vPCSo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iffTJ1vPCSo 5 MB in size) it is a real concern that lots of security gaps will be found (and some have been found in the past), which, because of Intel ME's structure (according to https://schd.ws/hosted_files/osseu17/84/Replace%20UEFI%20with%20Linux.pdf https://schd.ws/hosted_files/osseu17/84/Replace%20UEFI%20wit... it runs on ring -3) can easily lead to really dangerous security holes. Just for this reason alone any responsible admin should try to disable Intel ME so that this security liability does not have to stay open. PRISM is a surveillance program by the NSA.
  - agumonkey 9y ago
    how hard would it be for a bunch of semiconductor / cpu designers / cs students to team up and release a nice open hardware so that we can forget about PRISM and the likes ?
    - tonysdg 9y ago
      That's the whole idea behind the RISC-V platform [1]. It's well-funded, well-designed, has amazing pedigree (David Patterson literally wrote the book on computer architecture). It's even licensed such that companies can use it in proprietary designs. And yet, making the actual switch is a tremendously difficult task. On the software side alone, it requires recompiling every application you want to run on your platform. That doesn't even touch the cost of rolling the actual hardware. There are more than a few examples of this: Intel's Itanium, Oracle's SPARC, Berkeley's MIPS, Transmeta's Crusoe, etc. Sure, these all had niches (embedded systems, research hardware, a few high-end servers) -- but breaking out into the mainstream (a.k.a. like x86-64 and ARM/ARM64) is damn near impossible. [1] https://riscv.org/ https://riscv.org/
      - agumonkey 9y ago
        I heard that so far riscv chips (a few were taped IIRC) were just too slow. I deeply believe that with simple and open silicon (cpu, gpu) you'd get a huge amount of visible benefits for end users that don't require Apple A10 levels of performance. - Less bugs - Potentially better applications since the lower layers are stable and don't require you to fight it (as an example, pre vulkan drivers were hell, linux software has to circle around that)
      - terlisimo 9y ago
        This would be a bit different. Itanium, Sparc, Crusoe, ARM... all these CPUs were offering is the promise of better performance in some aspect. Nobody expects RISC-V to beat i7 or Ryzen in any benchmarks. IMO its purpose is to be the in hardware what GNU/Linux was in software. edit: GNU/Linux, not just Linux :)
        wolfgke 9y ago
  - fhood 9y ago
    No, from a security stand point I can feel pretty confidant that Apple is better so long as iOS 0days are still selling for 10x that of their counterparts.
mcphage 9y ago
> Despite this I am seriously considering an iPhone, their stance on privacy is the only reason. That's definitely a great reason to get one. A nice bonus you'll find, once you do, is that they're nowhere near as fragile as you fear.
- seba_dos1 9y ago
  Nor as private as you wish.
  - 0xJRS 9y ago
    As someone who does own an iPhone i'm genuinely curious what your largest concerns are about its privacy
    - hellcow 9y ago
      Apple's documented history of working with the NSA to undermine the privacy of its users: PRISM. Tim Cook struck that deal with the NSA and remains CEO today.
      - astral303 9y ago
        It is not true that Tim Cook struck a deal with the NSA. Nor is it true that Apple has worked with the NSA for PRISM. NSA likely exploited the SSL vulnerability in iOS 6.0 (released Sept 2012, NSA added Apple Oct 2012) and got access to snoop on Apple's data. After pulling the phrase "participate knowingly" out of thin air, Washington Post was forced to walk back that statement: "Hours after the news broke, and every company bar PalTalk and AOL denied any knowledge of the program and allegations of their involvement, the Post has changed its stance. The phrase “participate knowingly” has been removed from the article, a new passage suggests the firms were unaware of PRISM" https://thenextweb.com/us/2013/06/07/wapost-backtracks-on-claim-tech-companies-participate-knowingly-in-prism-data-collection/ https://thenextweb.com/us/2013/06/07/wapost-backtracks-on-cl...
        9y ago
CaptSpify 9y ago
The only real reason I haven't switched is because they won't give me control of my phone. At least with Android I can root it, install custom roms, and mess with pretty much any non-google software that I have on there. Android is far from perfect, and I still hate it, but at least I can still control most of it.
- nyolfen 9y ago
  > At least with Android I can root it, and not just you :P
- GeekyBear 9y ago
  The iOS equivalent of rooting your device is called a jailbreak. >Jailbreaking permits root access to iOS, allowing the downloading and installation of additional applications, extensions, and themes that are unavailable through the official Apple App Store. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ios_jailbreak https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ios_jailbreak
spike021 9y ago
The iPhone is unbelievably fragile, before you look at the high price. Apple bends over backwards to deny the existence of design flaws, to the point of blaming users for doing it wrong. I'd say I _mostly_ disagree. Many times over the years there have been "major" problems (i.e. antenna-gate and bendgate to name a couple). I've never experienced those issues, and I'm sure neither have many others. The iPhones through the years have been mostly solid for me in terms of hardware without significant design flaws. Now, I don't try to claim iPhones are perfect, but I think this is an over-reaction.
- andreareina 9y ago
  Anecdotally (but with n = many), I see many more scratched/broken iPhone screens than premium Android. Similar prices, same peer group. There are probably other sources of selection bias I'm not seeing, but it's a large enough effect that I'm cautiously positive of my determination absent an actual survey. It took two years for Apple to acknowledge[1] that #staingate was a real issue. I do think their hardware is generally high quality, but there are holes, and they are magnified by their positioning as a premium brand and certain high-profile denials of said holes. Which for a brand that lives and dies on its reputation seems less than smart. Adding to the weirdness is that I've alternately received excellent support in cases of hardware issues, and next to none. My guess is that the frontline has a whitelist of issues that they can okay, and have no little latitude beyond that. [1]: https://www.macrumors.com/2017/02/24/apple-extended-anti-reflective-repair-program/ https://www.macrumors.com/2017/02/24/apple-extended-anti-ref...
  - rconti 9y ago
    Anecdotally, I just never see cracked screens on phones anymore. Only data I could find, but very, very old (only covers to iphone 4(!!) https://www.squaretrade.com/cell-phone-comparison-study-nov-10 https://www.squaretrade.com/cell-phone-comparison-study-nov-...
rconti 9y ago
They're certainly fragile, but I don't believe they're any more fragile than other major flagship phones.
- andreareina 9y ago
  I'll quote my reply[1] to 'spike021 > Anecdotally (but with n = many), I see many more scratched/broken iPhone screens than premium Android. Similar prices, same peer group. There are probably other sources of selection bias I'm not seeing, but it's a large enough effect that I'm cautiously positive of my determination absent an actual survey. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15607637 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15607637
fermienrico 9y ago
> The iPhone is unbelievable fragile. This is such a handwavy statement. Fragile, compared to the competition? Can you point out any objective measure that supports "Unbelievably" fragile? All modern phones are fragile. Some slightly more than others.
- CaptSpify 9y ago
  Just because a lot of other people on the market make fragile phones doesn't change the fact the that the iPhone is also fragile.
- andreareina 9y ago
  I'll quote my reply[1] to 'spike021 > Anecdotally (but with n = many), I see many more scratched/broken iPhone screens than premium Android. Similar prices, same peer group. There are probably other sources of selection bias I'm not seeing, but it's a large enough effect that I'm cautiously positive of my determination absent an actual survey. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15607637 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15607637

frankmcsherry 9y ago

> Wired recently deployed a team of experts to deconstruct Apple’s code and found its differential privacy practices to be lacking, a characterization that the company strongly disputes. If by "deployed" they mean "interviewed about their work". I don't understand Time crediting Wired with the research[0], which does a disservice to their actual sources of funding. https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.02753 https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.02753

away2017throw 9y ago

It helps when you don't have an ads business branch.

EADGBE 9y ago
(yet)
- helb 9y ago
  more like (anymore): https://developer.apple.com/support/iad/ https://developer.apple.com/support/iad/
Mindwipe 9y ago
Apple did until last year though.
- pwinnski 9y ago
  ...which failed due to their strict privacy rules making the ads less effective than advertisers wanted.

dingaling 9y ago

Apple itself may well have a pro-privacy stance regarding the data associated with their products & services, but if I can't even install a firewall on one of their phones then that doesn't protect my privacy much against malicious or deceptive third-parties. I don't much like Android as a system but at least I can strip it of Google services and install a firewall and feel reasonably private. It's not an ideal option but it works.

BillinghamJ 9y ago
It does have a firewall. The configuration is static: no incoming connections. You might be thinking about not being able to have an antivirus? In which case, that is certainly a feature - not a bug. Allowing the privileges required to enable an AV to operate on iOS would severely degrade the security of your device. The losses would massively outweigh any potential benefits of having an AV.
- 45h34jh53k4j 9y ago
  I ran an outgoing firewall on ios from about ios5 to ios8 (FirewallIP -- jb only). I lament every day since ios9 (and not jailbreaking) about its loss. Its a killer feature that apple should implement. Many apps connects back frequently -- sometimes every action I take. Enough!
- Yetanfou 9y ago
  Blocking incoming connections on a mobile device is less important than blocking outgoing connections given the threat model of a multitude of mobile devices running basically black-box applications which have access to a range of sensors. The main threat here is applications gathering data - of any sort, from positional to audiovisual to network traffic to (financial) transactional - and sending it off to their masters. The threat is, so to say, inside the walls already, not outside. The task it to make sure it does not communicate to the outside world. iOS does not allow fine-grained control over outgoing network access. The assumption is that the user trusts the application to not do anything untoward, after all it was vetted by Apple before it appeared in the store. There are ways to get this type of control on iOS but since the first step you need to take is to 'jailbreak' the device this is not a real solution. Android does allow this type of control through a multitude of firewall (i.e. Linux iptables) configuration applications. Android devices running version 3.x or earlier need to be 'rooted' to gain access to the firewall configuration, later versions (from 4.0) don't require rooting. The 'no-root' firewall works by routing all traffic through an on-device VPN (which can be instantiated without root access as of Android 4.0). This does mean the firewall application gets access to all network traffic, making that type of application a good target for those who wish to subvert Android network security.

thisisit 9y ago

This might as well be titled - Forget Iphone X-Apple's Best Product is that they are not out to sell you anything else - ads (Google) or other products (Amazon). If a stance on something is due not having a particular type of business, is it really worth the praise?

fredleblanc 9y ago
But it's chicken and egg, right? They don't have that particular business because they made the choice of privacy long ago? Even if they're not in the ads business because of a series of lucky decisions that just happened to steer them this way, there's nothing wrong with touting a selling point.
- adamlett 9y ago
  No. Apple has had the same business model always, which is to sell you hardware differentiated by software at a premium. Apple doesn't have an advertising-based business model[1] because such a model is fundamentally incompatible with their existing business model. The reason is that for an advertising based model to be truly successful, you have to reach as many consumers as possible, which ultimately means that your product must be free to use for consumers. Apple's stance on privacy is making a virtue out of necessity. [1] Yes, yes, I know: iAd. But how well did that work?
  - 013a 9y ago
    I think its more complicated than that. There are reports that Apple has an internal committee, including a high level executive, dubbed their "privacy czars" which are required to unanimously sign off on any instance of user data collection, and this committee has actively limited products like Siri over concerns [1] There's also the San Bernadino customer letter, which has become a defining point in their privacy history [2]. They didn't have to publish that letter; they could have fought it privately or not fought it. There's really no fundamental reason why iAd couldn't have become a more powerful revenue generating part of their platform. They sell enough iPhones to reach a broad market. But, per [1], reports say that the team ran into internal privacy concerns which constantly forced limiting its capabilities. Apple is fundamentally different, in ways that can't solely be explained by their product history and revenue sources. Companies like HP and Samsung make consumer hardware, but also generate revenue by selling their customers' data to third parties. Its clear to me that Apple does consider Privacy a revenue-generating product that they sell. Of course, you can argue that maybe they wouldn't take that stance if they weren't so successful in hardware; that Privacy is a privilege afforded to them because of their success, and less successful companies need that advertising revenue. But now we're arguing hypotheticals, and I'm not going to partake in that. [1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-encryption-privacy-insight/apple-privacy-czars-grapple-with-internal-conflicts-over-user-data-idUSKCN0WN0BO https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-encryption-privacy-... [2] https://www.apple.com/customer-letter/ https://www.apple.com/customer-letter/

khana 9y ago

You got that right.

TazeTSchnitzel 9y ago

From what I've heard from a friend who works for Apple, it's more than skin-deep, they have a strict internal culture of user privacy. It's difficult to get permission to report any kind of user data or to bypass the sandbox, for example.

damnyou 9y ago
This is true of all large corps. Accessing user data without a really good reason will get you walked out the door instantly.
- TazeTSchnitzel 9y ago
  I don't mean accessing data on their servers, but rather analytics and the like. They don't get shader content in their crash reports because it might have been generated from user data somehow.

singularity2001 9y ago

Would this be a fair assessment: ? Facebook, Microsoft and Google collect all your private information and share it with themselves, the government and some with the advertisement industry. Apple collects some of your private information and is forced to share it with themselves, Nuance and the government (subvertly see snowden and interpolate). Amazon is in a special position.

criddell 9y ago
> some with the advertisement industry I'm always interested when people say this. Say I want to buy some person's data. Is there a way I can do that with Facebook, Microsoft, or Google?
- MBCook 9y ago
  No, because it’s far too valuable to them. If they sold it it wouldn’t be valuable for long. They do it ‘the other way’. You say “I want to buy some eyeballs like X” and they sell you access to the eyeballs. But they don’t give you the person’s information.
  - criddell 9y ago
    That's what I thought. So my private information isn't really shared with anybody, is it? I mean I guess if I were to place an ad targeted to black men that speak french and you answered it, I would learn that about you.
    - MBCook 9y ago
      It’s shared with anyone inside facebook who want to use it for something. I’ve never gotten the impression there are strong internal privacy controls. External companies? Perhaps if they partner with Facebook but not normal ad buyers.
      - praneshp 9y ago

sgift 9y ago

Reading about all of this is so surreal for me as a German. I read about these "great" policy and all I can think is ... "so, they do the minimum required" .. what's there to praise? Then I remember how US (companies) tend to think about privacy and get very sad. Stronger penalties for anyone breaking relevant privacy rules cannot come fast enough.

kobeya 9y ago
Europe may have strong laws regarding privacy. Those laws don’t apply to government requests. That’s a difference.
- sgift 9y ago
  Germanys data protection laws bind the government too. The government cannot request any data they like without a valid reason (though still too much in my opinion).
  - jandrese 9y ago
    There are a lot of checks in the US that require a "valid reason", but in the end the people granting those requests tend to rubber stamp everything that goes across their desk, and the only rejections are for people who make errors on the request form. It might stop a really egregious violation (spying on political rivals for example), but for general public the protection is pretty weak.
MBCook 9y ago
In everything that keeps happening in the US with regard to leaks and advertisers watching you and Facebook profiling you... I’m not sure it’s fixable. Until a large chunk of congress, and probably the R chunk due to their privacy law stance, gets a TON of embarrassing stuff leaked to the public or better yet ‘shared’ when they weren’t expecting it... I don’t think anything will change. We won’t get real laws to protect people. And a decent sized part of me says not even incidents like that would do it. It would just be blame-the-victim and you-accepted-that-policy and the laws wouldn’t really change.

exitreturn123 9y ago

I work closely with Apple so need to post anonymously. I believed everything in this until something that happened in late July this past summer. In China, their fastest-growing market, China demanded all secure messaging and VPN apps be removed from the App Store and Apple complied.[1] So privacy matters, unless it's in your fastest-growing market. I intend to discuss with Tim next time I see him. 1: https://techcrunch.com/2017/07/29/apple-removes-vpn-apps-from-the-app-store-in-china/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/07/29/apple-removes-vpn-apps-fro...

jonknee 9y ago
What is the correct move? Refuse to follow the law and withdraw from the market completely? How about when Apple removed apps from developers based in Iran because of US sanctions? https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/24/technology/apple-iran.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/24/technology/apple-iran.htm...
- freehunter 9y ago
  >Refuse to follow the law and withdraw from the market completely? Your tone of voice seems to indicate you don't think that's actually an option.
  - MBCook 9y ago
    You can’t do that. It’s China. It’s one of the largest markets on Earth and Apple is a public company. Cook would immediately be fired by the board. They’d put someone new in, and that someone new would comply with China’s demand. And no one would be better off. As Cook says at least Apple does the best they can and holds the line on other things like encrypting iMessage.
    - chimeracoder 9y ago
      > You can’t do that. It’s China. It’s one of the largest markets on Earth and Apple is a public company. Cook would immediately be fired by the board. They’d put someone new in, and that someone new would comply with China’s demand. Somehow, that didn't happen when Google effectively withdrew from China.

jclay 9y ago

Apple's position on privacy also led me to switch to iCloud recently. I migrated my mail and drive to iCloud (from GMail, Google Drive) for this very reason and while there isn't always a 1-1 feature parity, I prefer to know that my data won't be used to analyze and categorize me for the purpose of advertising.

kobeya 9y ago
How did you do this without changing your email address?
- jclay 9y ago
  There's not a great way unfortunately. I just switched all of my accounts that send transactional emails (Amazon receipts, Uber, etc) over to iCloud and then forwarded my old Gmail. There's no turn-key method I'm aware of, but It was important to me that I could have my purchase and trip logs stored somewhere that respects my privacy.
ProAm 9y ago
iCloud isnt safe though [1] [1] https://www.popsci.com/apple-cares-about-your-privacy-unless-you-use-icloud https://www.popsci.com/apple-cares-about-your-privacy-unless...
duality 9y ago
What makes you claim (implicitly) that Google, Dropbox, etc. are selling data from your email or storage accounts?
- jclay 9y ago
  I suppose I should clarify that I'm referring to the data being used to classify me into various (increasingly specific) categories and that resulting output being sold to the highest bidder in the form of a targeted advertisement. Dropbox I'm less familiar with, so I can't speak to their model.

karpodiem 9y ago

fun little incident this morning - with my wifi off, I logged into iCloud.com to change my primary AppleID e-mail address from an .edu to icloud.com address (https://www.macrumors.com/2017/10/31/apple-id-third-party-email-address-update/ https://www.macrumors.com/2017/10/31/apple-id-third-party-em... Interesting location identification for the request origination - https://www.dropbox.com/s/v9rtg1igl73gf67/where.png?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/v9rtg1igl73gf67/where.png?dl=0 Now, I've seen 2FA requests a couple hundred miles off, but this is _way_ off. I'm in the suburbs of metropolitan Detroit. For a lark, I googled 'NSA Texas' - https://goo.gl/maps/rb1AhG3EiE62 https://goo.gl/maps/rb1AhG3EiE62 Hello NSA! You might want to review the process on that one.

matthewmacleod 9y ago
Or in actuality, it’s just sloppy IP geolocation.
- astral303 9y ago
  Indeed, Occam's razor says poor IP geolocation. What are the chances that you are being monitored by NSA from Texas, or that the geolocation database is stale or wrong?
  - frickinLasers 9y ago
    Out of curiosity, what are the chances this geolocation error also exists 170 miles away? I had the exact same thing happen a few weeks ago, from just east of Chicago.

lefstathiou 9y ago

I’m a big fan of this - want to point out that the motivation behind this is as much economic as it is philosophical. Apple’s stance on privacy is 100% in their economic interest because it negatively impacts Google, Facebook and Amazon’s data-driven business models without Apple looking like a bad actor in the ecosystem. These companies are its biggest threats in software and it puts moats around Apple’s hardware business

rallycarre 9y ago

lol....