5 ms·

I'm a big fan of the feature, was quite thrilled to see it, but aren't they the provider of the redirect? So there is privacy to anyone but Apple: they'll know

by jsgo 7y ago

I'm a big fan of the feature, was quite thrilled to see it, but aren't they the provider of the redirect? So there is privacy to anyone but Apple: they'll know (if they wish to) that you signed up on Some Site with a burner email in a way they might not have if you used a regular burner email service. Personally, I'm fine with Apple having that kind of info as I generally trust them and also that my main concern is the same with your frustration of my email ending up in yet another leak seemingly frequently.

thaumaturgy 7y ago
> Personally, I'm fine with Apple having that kind of info as I generally trust them ...up until Apple decides to change their leadership, or their business model, or the mobile market implodes and they start looking for new revenue streams, or their relationship with the US government changes, or ... I get that as a practical matter we are forced to trust somebody somewhere eventually, but at best we should be saying that "Apple doesn't seem motivated to abuse this information for now."
- olliej 7y ago
  Which is why Apple protects your data in a way they can't access it - in the event that they change into Google and Facebook in future they have no access to the current information.
  - lucasmullens 7y ago
    I don't think it's valid to say Apple can't access your data. Maybe I'm understanding it wrong, but wouldn't that mean all your data would have to be encrypted with a private key that only you have? All I use to access my Apple data is a password, which I can reset at anytime.
    - olliej 7y ago
      Correct, all your data on apple's services are encrypted such that apple can't access them. The final fallback for account recovery is the "iCloud key vault" which is covered in documentation they published. Those are essentially HSMs gated by your account password and passcode, and a counter that triggers recovery key erasure. I think the primary security white paper describes exactly how it works, but essentially there's a set of shared symmetric keys that are encrypted to public keys for each of your devices. Outside of the key vault path, the way a new device gets access to those keys is one of your other 2fa devices encrypt a decryption key to the new device when you approve it. The basic result is that there is no point in which the key material is transmitted unencrypted off a device.
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      - aboodman 7y ago
        I mean, Apple can push a software update that changes how this works. But what you describe is still a lot better than nothing.
      - saagarjha 7y ago
        > all your data on apple's services are encrypted such that apple can't access them This is only true for certain services.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- closetohome 7y ago
  To be perfectly cynical, I'm willing to temporarily give the benefit of the doubt to the company that's not currently selling my personal information to marketers, over the companies that are doing so flagrantly.
  - matwood 7y ago
    Exactly. With Apple it's "what if" their customers suddenly become advertisers, whereas Google and FB their customers already are advertisers. Apple is in a unique position where they can sell hardware at profit making prices to a huge customer base. Even if we are at peak iPhone, current Apple users are not going anywhere (I tried to switch my wife to an Android phone once and it was a disaster hah). Privacy moves like Apple ID will only solidify the current user base. Best in class products like AirPods and the AppleWatch also lock users in - in a good way though. I've noticed that since this announcement it is also pulling some stout Android users I know who have become disillusioned with how Google is slowly locking Android down. The constant bad press Google has received combined with the Apple privacy drum beat is starting to pay dividends for Apple.
- shuckles 7y ago
  This is a common perspective, and it is generally correct and worth considering. However, for a company like Apple to change its stance would take a long time. Culture is sticky and, furthermore, they simply don't have the mass data collection and processing pipelines necessary for such an about face. There would be a fairly long period (my guess is years) during which consumers would be able to change providers.
  - saagarjha 7y ago
    Data sticks around for a lot longer than “a long time”.
    - kalleboo 7y ago
      Which is why it's nice that current-Apple is committed to not collecting data.
    - shuckles 7y ago
      My comment was the work Apple would need to do before collecting that data. Anyways, GDPR gives you the right to deletion at any time. Apple has publicly committed to offering GDPR rights to everyone.
- briandear 7y ago
  The company has been around for over 40 years. Have they done anything to suggest that they’ll just randomly go rogue? Their brand is built on some amount of user trust, if they start violating that, there’d be significant market risk which makes no sense for them to do. They can and are already winning when it comes to privacy, violating that would be incredibly stupid from a business perspective. Privacy is one of their competitive advantages.
  - olliej 7y ago
    I feel more importantly they go to great lengths to create a brand image (because after all, everything else aside, they are a for profit company) and I imagine that reneging on the privacy angle would be considered to be damaging to the brand. I feel of all the major tech companies, Apple is way more invested in retaining their brand image.
- redler 7y ago
  While that's all true, again as a practical matter, a massive multi-decade-old denizen like Apple in some ways has more cultural and institutional inertia than even the US government. Especially now. Life is short; Apple's "for now" has been 43 years running.
- olliej 7y ago
  Yeah, I do agree here - as much as I love to believe that this is a core belief of all the employees at apple - and in my experience this is a true statement - we have to remember that Apple is a company, and there is undeniably a huge marketing ability in privacy given that their business model doesn't depend on selling information. But there's also a huge security benefit to apple not tracking this information: A hacker/angry-former-employee/creepy-current-employee can't access it either (eg. like the various stories we here about fb,uber,etc admins and employees spying on people).
olliej 7y ago
That's answered in the video: They don't record app usage, they don't record or monitor email that goes over the cloaked address. The problem with burner address servers: * They don't protect against fake addresses (which is why many services actually block them) * They are much harder for regular users to use * They're annoying to use, and fundamentally require providing your email address to yet another third party Apple Sign-In clearly make the use of cloaking addresses much easier. Again this still only applies to "social" logins, you're welcome to have your own login system.
- jsgo 7y ago
  Not knocking the system, quite thrilled by it personally: the other option is Google or Facebook at this point and if I got off OAuth and email with Google (leaning towards buying a personal domain and going with proton mail or similar, may wait until this built in burner option is available), I could probably rid myself of them (Facebook is more of a mental break I’d need to make, honestly). I’d love this. I’ve personally tried personal burner email addresses for forums sign ups but the thing I found is that it is a maintenance (if that’s the correct word) nightmare. If you go with the ones that last for a brief period of time, you better guard the credentials because there’s no clicking forget password. I’m hopeful of the feature, but even if it proves to not be that great, I’d still rather they be my identity provider over Facebook or Google so it’ll still feel like a net win.
buboard 7y ago
Conceivably they could theoretically even spy on your emails with the companies you 've signed up with, including apple's competitors. It could even lead to potential legal issues for apple. At least plain email is considered distributed and does not rely on gatekeepers.
- scarface74 7y ago
  As opposed to Google and Facebook that convinced users to install apps that went around the App Store so they could record everything that you do with your phone or Facebook buying Onava (a VPN provider) with the express purpose of spying on you? Apple could in the future become evil after 40+ years. The other two companies are actively evil.
  - buboard 7y ago
    iirc they actually paid those users. And i don't think any company should be trusted. Apple was part of prism and is known to strong-arm their users to stay locked in their ecosystem. This sign in is a good step for security, but i don't think there can be such a thing as corporate-owned privacy.
    - scarface74 7y ago
      “strong arm their users”? Do jack booted thugs come to my door to force me not to buy an Android device? Do you really think most users were aware that they were giving up their privacy? Even if you assume they do, Google broke a contract with Apple by using a developer certification.
      - buboard 7y ago
        Ur arguments are extreme. Apple does lock-in users and developers more than anyone else by enforcing rules and taking away/not implementing features, that's trivial for anyone who has an ios device to see. Agreed though, facebook and google also lock-in users by providing enough free services to users that they don't want to leave. That's a different level of coercion though.

by jsgo 7y ago

thaumaturgy 7y ago

> Personally, I'm fine with Apple having that kind of info as I generally trust them ...up until Apple decides to change their leadership, or their business model, or the mobile market implodes and they start looking for new revenue streams, or their relationship with the US government changes, or ... I get that as a practical matter we are forced to trust somebody somewhere eventually, but at best we should be saying that "Apple doesn't seem motivated to abuse this information for now."

olliej 7y ago
Which is why Apple protects your data in a way they can't access it - in the event that they change into Google and Facebook in future they have no access to the current information.
- lucasmullens 7y ago
  I don't think it's valid to say Apple can't access your data. Maybe I'm understanding it wrong, but wouldn't that mean all your data would have to be encrypted with a private key that only you have? All I use to access my Apple data is a password, which I can reset at anytime.
  - olliej 7y ago
    Correct, all your data on apple's services are encrypted such that apple can't access them. The final fallback for account recovery is the "iCloud key vault" which is covered in documentation they published. Those are essentially HSMs gated by your account password and passcode, and a counter that triggers recovery key erasure. I think the primary security white paper describes exactly how it works, but essentially there's a set of shared symmetric keys that are encrypted to public keys for each of your devices. Outside of the key vault path, the way a new device gets access to those keys is one of your other 2fa devices encrypt a decryption key to the new device when you approve it. The basic result is that there is no point in which the key material is transmitted unencrypted off a device.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - aboodman 7y ago
      I mean, Apple can push a software update that changes how this works. But what you describe is still a lot better than nothing.
    - saagarjha 7y ago
      > all your data on apple's services are encrypted such that apple can't access them This is only true for certain services.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
closetohome 7y ago
To be perfectly cynical, I'm willing to temporarily give the benefit of the doubt to the company that's not currently selling my personal information to marketers, over the companies that are doing so flagrantly.
- matwood 7y ago
  Exactly. With Apple it's "what if" their customers suddenly become advertisers, whereas Google and FB their customers already are advertisers. Apple is in a unique position where they can sell hardware at profit making prices to a huge customer base. Even if we are at peak iPhone, current Apple users are not going anywhere (I tried to switch my wife to an Android phone once and it was a disaster hah). Privacy moves like Apple ID will only solidify the current user base. Best in class products like AirPods and the AppleWatch also lock users in - in a good way though. I've noticed that since this announcement it is also pulling some stout Android users I know who have become disillusioned with how Google is slowly locking Android down. The constant bad press Google has received combined with the Apple privacy drum beat is starting to pay dividends for Apple.
shuckles 7y ago
This is a common perspective, and it is generally correct and worth considering. However, for a company like Apple to change its stance would take a long time. Culture is sticky and, furthermore, they simply don't have the mass data collection and processing pipelines necessary for such an about face. There would be a fairly long period (my guess is years) during which consumers would be able to change providers.
- saagarjha 7y ago
  Data sticks around for a lot longer than “a long time”.
  - kalleboo 7y ago
    Which is why it's nice that current-Apple is committed to not collecting data.
  - shuckles 7y ago
    My comment was the work Apple would need to do before collecting that data. Anyways, GDPR gives you the right to deletion at any time. Apple has publicly committed to offering GDPR rights to everyone.
briandear 7y ago
The company has been around for over 40 years. Have they done anything to suggest that they’ll just randomly go rogue? Their brand is built on some amount of user trust, if they start violating that, there’d be significant market risk which makes no sense for them to do. They can and are already winning when it comes to privacy, violating that would be incredibly stupid from a business perspective. Privacy is one of their competitive advantages.
- olliej 7y ago
  I feel more importantly they go to great lengths to create a brand image (because after all, everything else aside, they are a for profit company) and I imagine that reneging on the privacy angle would be considered to be damaging to the brand. I feel of all the major tech companies, Apple is way more invested in retaining their brand image.
redler 7y ago
While that's all true, again as a practical matter, a massive multi-decade-old denizen like Apple in some ways has more cultural and institutional inertia than even the US government. Especially now. Life is short; Apple's "for now" has been 43 years running.
olliej 7y ago
Yeah, I do agree here - as much as I love to believe that this is a core belief of all the employees at apple - and in my experience this is a true statement - we have to remember that Apple is a company, and there is undeniably a huge marketing ability in privacy given that their business model doesn't depend on selling information. But there's also a huge security benefit to apple not tracking this information: A hacker/angry-former-employee/creepy-current-employee can't access it either (eg. like the various stories we here about fb,uber,etc admins and employees spying on people).

olliej 7y ago

That's answered in the video: They don't record app usage, they don't record or monitor email that goes over the cloaked address. The problem with burner address servers: * They don't protect against fake addresses (which is why many services actually block them) * They are much harder for regular users to use * They're annoying to use, and fundamentally require providing your email address to yet another third party Apple Sign-In clearly make the use of cloaking addresses much easier. Again this still only applies to "social" logins, you're welcome to have your own login system.

jsgo 7y ago
Not knocking the system, quite thrilled by it personally: the other option is Google or Facebook at this point and if I got off OAuth and email with Google (leaning towards buying a personal domain and going with proton mail or similar, may wait until this built in burner option is available), I could probably rid myself of them (Facebook is more of a mental break I’d need to make, honestly). I’d love this. I’ve personally tried personal burner email addresses for forums sign ups but the thing I found is that it is a maintenance (if that’s the correct word) nightmare. If you go with the ones that last for a brief period of time, you better guard the credentials because there’s no clicking forget password. I’m hopeful of the feature, but even if it proves to not be that great, I’d still rather they be my identity provider over Facebook or Google so it’ll still feel like a net win.

buboard 7y ago

Conceivably they could theoretically even spy on your emails with the companies you 've signed up with, including apple's competitors. It could even lead to potential legal issues for apple. At least plain email is considered distributed and does not rely on gatekeepers.

scarface74 7y ago
As opposed to Google and Facebook that convinced users to install apps that went around the App Store so they could record everything that you do with your phone or Facebook buying Onava (a VPN provider) with the express purpose of spying on you? Apple could in the future become evil after 40+ years. The other two companies are actively evil.
- buboard 7y ago
  iirc they actually paid those users. And i don't think any company should be trusted. Apple was part of prism and is known to strong-arm their users to stay locked in their ecosystem. This sign in is a good step for security, but i don't think there can be such a thing as corporate-owned privacy.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    “strong arm their users”? Do jack booted thugs come to my door to force me not to buy an Android device? Do you really think most users were aware that they were giving up their privacy? Even if you assume they do, Google broke a contract with Apple by using a developer certification.
    - buboard 7y ago
      Ur arguments are extreme. Apple does lock-in users and developers more than anyone else by enforcing rules and taking away/not implementing features, that's trivial for anyone who has an ios device to see. Agreed though, facebook and google also lock-in users by providing enough free services to users that they don't want to leave. That's a different level of coercion though.