5 ms·

Apple makes its money from expensive hardware. And respecting your privacy and security helps selling it a lot. And they earned trust by being serious about it

Apple makes its money from expensive hardware. And respecting your privacy and security helps selling it a lot. And they earned trust by being serious about it for a long time.

GuB-42 8y ago
Uhm 2014 ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICloud_leaks_of_celebrity_photos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICloud_leaks_of_celebrity_phot... By comparaison, while there have been a few issues with Google, for a company that processes so much personal data, their track record is excellent. I can't think of any major personal data leak that could be attributed to Google. Maybe Apple got better within these 4 years, TBH, they most likely did. However, I don't consider 4 years to be a "long time" for a tech giant. Their privacy focus is relatively recent.
- greglindahl 8y ago
  The iPhone 5s is the first one with a great secure enclave, and it was planned out a lot longer than 4 years ago.
- groyperist 8y ago
  Did you even read the Wiki article you linked to? Even if we ignore your conflation of information security and privacy, the Fappening was not caused by a security breach at Apple, but rather through the use of targeted phishing attacks.
  - GuB-42 8y ago
    Definitely, and note that GP explicitly mentioned security, which is a good thing because they are tightly linked. You can't have privacy if you don't have security. The thing is: we often associate ad tracking and (lack of) privacy. It is certainly one aspect, but it is far from the whole picture. The most damaging form of privacy violations are usually not caused by advertisers but first by people who are close to you (ex: revenge porn), and second by hackers (ex: blackmail). I used the fappening as an example because nude pictures are the archetype of private data. As for targeting phishing, I think companies who take privacy seriously have to do something about it. Phishing is the number one threat users face when it comes to cybersecurity and therefore privacy. Now comes the debatable part: hackers targeted the iCloud platform, why? Why not Picasa, or Facebook, or whatever place images are stored? My hypothesis is that iCloud was the best target for such an attack, partly because compared to the others, it didn't offer as much anti-phishing security. EDIT: I just noticed I didn't mention governments. First, for most people in western countries, government is unlikely to be their biggest problem. So I would rather focus on the immediate surroundings (ex: boss, partner, neighbors, etc...). And if the government really is after you, then an Apple solution might be good, but I don't think they are completely turstworthy. They are still bound by the US law after all, and they are not completely zero-knowledge. To make things clear, Google and Facebook are also out in that case.
    - oarsinsync 8y ago
      > Now comes the debatable part: hackers targeted the iCloud platform, why? Why not Picasa, or Facebook, or whatever place images are stored? Possibly because the celebrities targeted used iPhones, and didn’t publish their private pictures to Facebook or a Google service.
izacus 8y ago
Until it paid for them them to sell out their Chinese customers. There they didn't think for a second.
- scarface74 8y ago
  I have no more trust in the American government to not spy on its citizens than the Chinese government. If iCloud data is encrypted and only the user has the private key. It's just as secure as being on American servers.
  - rock_hard 8y ago
    The difference being that Tim Cook handed Beijing the iCloud private keys for Chinese users
    - scarface74 8y ago
      How did he do that without completely rearchitecting how iOS works? Do you have any citations?
      - grumdan 8y ago
        I'm not saying that this is what happened and I don't know the background of this story, but it would have been easy (technically speaking) to just push an update to Chinese users that will extract their private key and send it back to Apple without any significant changes.
        majewsky 8y ago
        AFAIK the Secure Enclave chip is specifically designed to make this impossible. There is no planned method to extract the private key from it. ("Planned method" meaning anything that's not an exploit or an electron microscope.)
        zarex 8y ago
nickpsecurity 8y ago
Apple actually had some of the worst security for a long time. They even lied about Mac OS being immune to viruses rather than market share so low hackers didn't care about it. They still made piles of money due to great product development and marketing. Their brand was the main, selling point for a long time. The iOS situation is quite a turn around for them on privacy/security. They still sell them on mainly image, features, apps, and so on. Just like before [plus Windows-style app dominance] with privacy/security reporting in media likely about boosting sales. I don't trust it, though, if we're talking domestic surveillance. The ECI-level leaks said FBI "compels" domestic companies to enable their stuff for eavesdropping. Whatever that means is secret. In the Lavabit case, the FBI argued to the judge Lavabit wouldn't be harmed if they lied to their customers about the compromised. The judge agreed. So, court orders, fines, retaliation, forced lies, and secrecy orders of all that are a possibility in the United States. Just don't put secrets on anything made in America or by Americans. You can use American tech for obfuscation or untrusted functions, though.
- rimliu 8y ago
  Pre OS X versions of Apple OS had even smaller market share and way more viruses than current versions with much bigger market share.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
mihaela 8y ago
I use Apple products instead of Google's. They also look much better.

Apple makes its money from expensive hardware. And respecting your privacy and security helps selling it a lot. And they earned trust by being serious about it for a long time.

GuB-42 8y ago

Uhm 2014 ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICloud_leaks_of_celebrity_photos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICloud_leaks_of_celebrity_phot... By comparaison, while there have been a few issues with Google, for a company that processes so much personal data, their track record is excellent. I can't think of any major personal data leak that could be attributed to Google. Maybe Apple got better within these 4 years, TBH, they most likely did. However, I don't consider 4 years to be a "long time" for a tech giant. Their privacy focus is relatively recent.

greglindahl 8y ago
The iPhone 5s is the first one with a great secure enclave, and it was planned out a lot longer than 4 years ago.
groyperist 8y ago
Did you even read the Wiki article you linked to? Even if we ignore your conflation of information security and privacy, the Fappening was not caused by a security breach at Apple, but rather through the use of targeted phishing attacks.
- GuB-42 8y ago
  Definitely, and note that GP explicitly mentioned security, which is a good thing because they are tightly linked. You can't have privacy if you don't have security. The thing is: we often associate ad tracking and (lack of) privacy. It is certainly one aspect, but it is far from the whole picture. The most damaging form of privacy violations are usually not caused by advertisers but first by people who are close to you (ex: revenge porn), and second by hackers (ex: blackmail). I used the fappening as an example because nude pictures are the archetype of private data. As for targeting phishing, I think companies who take privacy seriously have to do something about it. Phishing is the number one threat users face when it comes to cybersecurity and therefore privacy. Now comes the debatable part: hackers targeted the iCloud platform, why? Why not Picasa, or Facebook, or whatever place images are stored? My hypothesis is that iCloud was the best target for such an attack, partly because compared to the others, it didn't offer as much anti-phishing security. EDIT: I just noticed I didn't mention governments. First, for most people in western countries, government is unlikely to be their biggest problem. So I would rather focus on the immediate surroundings (ex: boss, partner, neighbors, etc...). And if the government really is after you, then an Apple solution might be good, but I don't think they are completely turstworthy. They are still bound by the US law after all, and they are not completely zero-knowledge. To make things clear, Google and Facebook are also out in that case.
  - oarsinsync 8y ago
    > Now comes the debatable part: hackers targeted the iCloud platform, why? Why not Picasa, or Facebook, or whatever place images are stored? Possibly because the celebrities targeted used iPhones, and didn’t publish their private pictures to Facebook or a Google service.

izacus 8y ago

Until it paid for them them to sell out their Chinese customers. There they didn't think for a second.

scarface74 8y ago
I have no more trust in the American government to not spy on its citizens than the Chinese government. If iCloud data is encrypted and only the user has the private key. It's just as secure as being on American servers.
- rock_hard 8y ago
  The difference being that Tim Cook handed Beijing the iCloud private keys for Chinese users
  - scarface74 8y ago
    How did he do that without completely rearchitecting how iOS works? Do you have any citations?
    - grumdan 8y ago
      I'm not saying that this is what happened and I don't know the background of this story, but it would have been easy (technically speaking) to just push an update to Chinese users that will extract their private key and send it back to Apple without any significant changes.
      - majewsky 8y ago
        AFAIK the Secure Enclave chip is specifically designed to make this impossible. There is no planned method to extract the private key from it. ("Planned method" meaning anything that's not an exploit or an electron microscope.)
        zarex 8y ago

nickpsecurity 8y ago

Apple actually had some of the worst security for a long time. They even lied about Mac OS being immune to viruses rather than market share so low hackers didn't care about it. They still made piles of money due to great product development and marketing. Their brand was the main, selling point for a long time. The iOS situation is quite a turn around for them on privacy/security. They still sell them on mainly image, features, apps, and so on. Just like before [plus Windows-style app dominance] with privacy/security reporting in media likely about boosting sales. I don't trust it, though, if we're talking domestic surveillance. The ECI-level leaks said FBI "compels" domestic companies to enable their stuff for eavesdropping. Whatever that means is secret. In the Lavabit case, the FBI argued to the judge Lavabit wouldn't be harmed if they lied to their customers about the compromised. The judge agreed. So, court orders, fines, retaliation, forced lies, and secrecy orders of all that are a possibility in the United States. Just don't put secrets on anything made in America or by Americans. You can use American tech for obfuscation or untrusted functions, though.

rimliu 8y ago
Pre OS X versions of Apple OS had even smaller market share and way more viruses than current versions with much bigger market share.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

mihaela 8y ago

I use Apple products instead of Google's. They also look much better.