7 ms·

Have you looked at the keynote? They'll now be blocking a bunch of the tracking techniques that these apps use. Yes, you're right about the past, but they're ma

Have you looked at the keynote? They'll now be blocking a bunch of the tracking techniques that these apps use. Yes, you're right about the past, but they're making changes to be better in the future.

mirimir 7y ago
Sure. But would they have done this without the recent publicity about third-party app tracking? I suppose that they must have been working on this for some time. And maybe they deserve some slack. But there should at least be an apology for not acknowledging tracking by third-party apps. For years. While they were touting their privacy stance. And it's not just about behavioral ads. Some repressive governments have used iOS apps against dissidents.
- scarface74 7y ago
  How do you “guarantee” third party apps don’t do tracking and allow them - with your permission - to know your location?
  - mirimir 7y ago
    I'm not arguing that it's easy. Or even possible. What I am arguing is that Apple has been BSing people. > What happens on your iPhone, stays on your iPhone. Because that's just not true. Unless, I suppose, you don't install any third-party apps on your phone. So then, that privacy claim should look like: > What happens on your iPhone, stays on your iPhone.# > # Unless you install third-party apps. Otherwise, dissidents will feel safe using iPhones. Until they're dead or in prison.
    - bighi 7y ago
      Apple is talking about what their own products do. Their cameras, their apps, their devices. They can't 100% guarantee that third-party apps won't spy on you, and they don't even promise to do it. You might want to bash Apple for something they haven't promised and is probably not even possible. But that's on you, just baseless bashing.
      - mirimir 7y ago
        These apps are in their store. That implies that they have approved them.
        MBCook 7y ago
        Websites track iPhone users too. Is that also Apple’s fault?
        la_barba 7y ago
        What does it mean (officially) for an app to be approved? You seem to have your own interpretation.
        mirimir 7y ago
        You can read their policies as well as I can. Or better, perhaps. But my point is that Apple does have lots of rules about what apps can do, and can't do. And that it's been rather aggressive in applying those rules. If you search HN re some mix of ["Apple", "iOS", "app", "store", etc] you'll find complaints from developers about Apple removing their apps from its store. So, in that context, why were they silent for years about privacy risks of third-party apps? That wouldn't be a remarkable omission by Google, given that its business model is largely about monetizing users' information. But for Apple, which has been promoting itself as privacy-friendly, it strikes me as a glaring omission. I'm getting criticism for not acknowledging Apple for its stance on privacy, and for how much better it is than Google. And for blaming it for not being perfect. And yes, it is privacy-friendly, and does a far better job at privacy than Google does. What I'm criticizing is the failure to clearly acknowledge limitations. And I'm coming at this from the perspective of users who are concerned about threats to their privacy. Users who aren't very technical, and who may misunderstand just what Apple protects them from. Also, this isn't just me hating on Apple. I've said pretty much the same things about the Tor Project. Back in the day, when many users actually saw Tor start at the command line, they saw "[notice] Tor v0...(...). This is experimental software. Do not rely on it for strong anonymity." But the new https://www.torproject.org/ https://www.torproject.org/ starts with "Browse Privately. Explore Freely. Defend yourself against tracking and surveillance. Circumvent censorship." Finding anything at all about limitations is not so easy. About risks from global adversaries. About Tor-bypass risks in Tor browser. About risks from malware that phones home through clearnet, bypassing Tor. Conversely, when you start Tor browser in Whonix, you see "Whonix is experimental software. Do not rely on it for strong anonymity."
- huslage 7y ago
  I assume you're enough of an engineer to know that building an SSO service like this takes a lot of time and energy. Third party apps are exploiting loopholes in the system and Apple is closing those loopholes one-by-one. I don't think this is unnatural. No one has foresight.
  - mirimir 7y ago
    So are you arguing that Apple hasn't known about privacy violations by third-party apps in their store? Given that Apple is announcing patches for these loopholes, it must have been working on them for at least months, if not years. But searching "apple privacy third party app" shows nothing before late May, 2019. Maybe I missed something, and if I did, please share.
- elliekelly 7y ago
  > And maybe they deserve some slack. They deserve a lot of slack. Apple's privacy approach may not be perfect but they are head and shoulders above just about every other major tech company. I've written many privacy policies - for privacy-focused companies and for companies seeking to get away with the absolute bare-minimum. One of the best "quick and dirty" ways to assess a company's privacy policy without actually reading the whole thing is to count how many footnotes the document has. All of the important information that a company has to disclose but would rather not is hidden in the footnotes. Apple's privacy policy[1] has zero footnotes. Google's privacy policy[2] has 51. [1] https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/en-ww/ https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/en-ww/ [2] https://policies.google.com/privacy#intro https://policies.google.com/privacy#intro
  - gundmc 7y ago
    Can you clarify your comment? I don't see anything I would classify as a footnote in either linked policy.
    - elliekelly 7y ago
      Certainly! I contemplated explaining a bit further about Google's footnotes but thought I might sound crazy. Google actually takes the extra step of obscuring the footnotes to look like hyperlinks. For example, if you click "ads you'll find most useful" under "We want you to understand the types of information we collect as you use our services" you'll see that it pops out as a footnote rather than linking you to a new site. Because I often found myself looking for footnotes to find the begrudging disclosures and because I found more and more footnotes hiding as hyperlinks I made myself a little browser extension to highlight html elements that are probably footnotes as most are still pretty obvious from the properties. For example, from Google's privacy policy: <a class="g1mG8c" href="privacy#footnote-useful-ads" data-name="useful-ads"jsaction="click:IPbaae(preventDefault=true)">ads you’ll find most useful</a> I'm undecided whether this is a style decision or another attempt to hide the ball. Google used to publish a pdf version which made it much easier to see the footnotes but I haven't been able to find a current pdf version in years.

mirimir 7y ago

Sure. But would they have done this without the recent publicity about third-party app tracking? I suppose that they must have been working on this for some time. And maybe they deserve some slack. But there should at least be an apology for not acknowledging tracking by third-party apps. For years. While they were touting their privacy stance. And it's not just about behavioral ads. Some repressive governments have used iOS apps against dissidents.

scarface74 7y ago
How do you “guarantee” third party apps don’t do tracking and allow them - with your permission - to know your location?
- mirimir 7y ago
  I'm not arguing that it's easy. Or even possible. What I am arguing is that Apple has been BSing people. > What happens on your iPhone, stays on your iPhone. Because that's just not true. Unless, I suppose, you don't install any third-party apps on your phone. So then, that privacy claim should look like: > What happens on your iPhone, stays on your iPhone.# > # Unless you install third-party apps. Otherwise, dissidents will feel safe using iPhones. Until they're dead or in prison.
  - bighi 7y ago
    Apple is talking about what their own products do. Their cameras, their apps, their devices. They can't 100% guarantee that third-party apps won't spy on you, and they don't even promise to do it. You might want to bash Apple for something they haven't promised and is probably not even possible. But that's on you, just baseless bashing.
    - mirimir 7y ago
      These apps are in their store. That implies that they have approved them.
      - MBCook 7y ago
        Websites track iPhone users too. Is that also Apple’s fault?
      - la_barba 7y ago
        What does it mean (officially) for an app to be approved? You seem to have your own interpretation.
        mirimir 7y ago
        You can read their policies as well as I can. Or better, perhaps. But my point is that Apple does have lots of rules about what apps can do, and can't do. And that it's been rather aggressive in applying those rules. If you search HN re some mix of ["Apple", "iOS", "app", "store", etc] you'll find complaints from developers about Apple removing their apps from its store. So, in that context, why were they silent for years about privacy risks of third-party apps? That wouldn't be a remarkable omission by Google, given that its business model is largely about monetizing users' information. But for Apple, which has been promoting itself as privacy-friendly, it strikes me as a glaring omission. I'm getting criticism for not acknowledging Apple for its stance on privacy, and for how much better it is than Google. And for blaming it for not being perfect. And yes, it is privacy-friendly, and does a far better job at privacy than Google does. What I'm criticizing is the failure to clearly acknowledge limitations. And I'm coming at this from the perspective of users who are concerned about threats to their privacy. Users who aren't very technical, and who may misunderstand just what Apple protects them from. Also, this isn't just me hating on Apple. I've said pretty much the same things about the Tor Project. Back in the day, when many users actually saw Tor start at the command line, they saw "[notice] Tor v0...(...). This is experimental software. Do not rely on it for strong anonymity." But the new https://www.torproject.org/ https://www.torproject.org/ starts with "Browse Privately. Explore Freely. Defend yourself against tracking and surveillance. Circumvent censorship." Finding anything at all about limitations is not so easy. About risks from global adversaries. About Tor-bypass risks in Tor browser. About risks from malware that phones home through clearnet, bypassing Tor. Conversely, when you start Tor browser in Whonix, you see "Whonix is experimental software. Do not rely on it for strong anonymity."
huslage 7y ago
I assume you're enough of an engineer to know that building an SSO service like this takes a lot of time and energy. Third party apps are exploiting loopholes in the system and Apple is closing those loopholes one-by-one. I don't think this is unnatural. No one has foresight.
- mirimir 7y ago
  So are you arguing that Apple hasn't known about privacy violations by third-party apps in their store? Given that Apple is announcing patches for these loopholes, it must have been working on them for at least months, if not years. But searching "apple privacy third party app" shows nothing before late May, 2019. Maybe I missed something, and if I did, please share.
elliekelly 7y ago
> And maybe they deserve some slack. They deserve a lot of slack. Apple's privacy approach may not be perfect but they are head and shoulders above just about every other major tech company. I've written many privacy policies - for privacy-focused companies and for companies seeking to get away with the absolute bare-minimum. One of the best "quick and dirty" ways to assess a company's privacy policy without actually reading the whole thing is to count how many footnotes the document has. All of the important information that a company has to disclose but would rather not is hidden in the footnotes. Apple's privacy policy[1] has zero footnotes. Google's privacy policy[2] has 51. [1] https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/en-ww/ https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/en-ww/ [2] https://policies.google.com/privacy#intro https://policies.google.com/privacy#intro
- gundmc 7y ago
  Can you clarify your comment? I don't see anything I would classify as a footnote in either linked policy.
  - elliekelly 7y ago
    Certainly! I contemplated explaining a bit further about Google's footnotes but thought I might sound crazy. Google actually takes the extra step of obscuring the footnotes to look like hyperlinks. For example, if you click "ads you'll find most useful" under "We want you to understand the types of information we collect as you use our services" you'll see that it pops out as a footnote rather than linking you to a new site. Because I often found myself looking for footnotes to find the begrudging disclosures and because I found more and more footnotes hiding as hyperlinks I made myself a little browser extension to highlight html elements that are probably footnotes as most are still pretty obvious from the properties. For example, from Google's privacy policy: <a class="g1mG8c" href="privacy#footnote-useful-ads" data-name="useful-ads"jsaction="click:IPbaae(preventDefault=true)">ads you’ll find most useful</a> I'm undecided whether this is a style decision or another attempt to hide the ball. Google used to publish a pdf version which made it much easier to see the footnotes but I haven't been able to find a current pdf version in years.