7 ms·

As someone who has bought into that meme I will admit this feels like a pretty huge betrayal by Apple. So, yes, I think if Apple sticks with this, their whole p

by natch 7y ago

As someone who has bought into that meme I will admit this feels like a pretty huge betrayal by Apple. So, yes, I think if Apple sticks with this, their whole privacy stance is going in the toilet now. And a very dirty toilet it is. Beyond just the facts of not protecting data, there is also the deception. This is some really very, very, nasty stuff for Apple's brand and the reputation of every person who works at Apple. I don't know how to state it strongly enough. Huge Apple fan until today... see my comment history... this is devastating for them amongst the sliver of their users who pay attention to this stuff. And they should realize that even though we may be just a sliver, we can lead other customers away from them if we want to.

tomc1985 7y ago
Yeah, but what are the reasonable alternatives? Android, with its freewheeling stance on privacy and app permissions? Do they even let you disable location tracking any more?
- parthdesai 7y ago
  No, but Android/Google doesn't go out and advertise themselves as a privacy first company.
  - nicky0 7y ago
    I don't feel like being able to decrypt server backups on legal warrant completely destroys their stance of privacy focused. I mean if they started tracking your behavour and location, and mining it to better sell ads, maybe that would.
- imiric 7y ago
  Practically speaking there is no privacy in the digital world, unless you're willing to go full Stallman, or abandon modern society and go live in a mountain shack somewhere, and even there you'll have dozens of Starlink satellites overhead pretty soon. The best you can do if you're technically inclined is to use open source as much as possible (AOSP, postmarketOS, PureOS, etc.), minimize use of untrusted software and services (from all major corporations, no social media, no proprietary software in general), use network-level ad blockers, Tor if you think it helps, VPNs, encrypt everything, etc. And you'd still be tracked and profiled. If you're not technically savvy, forget about it. In either case if privacy is really a concern vote to elect politicians that are willing to enact laws that regulate the way companies can use personal data. Though considering both companies and governments benefit from the status quo, I don't foresee things improving in the near future, barring some kind of revolution where the majority wakes up, which is also unlikely. If the Snowden revelations didn't do it, I doubt anything will. So much for fighting 1984, Apple.
- post_below 7y ago
  Depending on what functionality you're willing to give up, an Android device can pretty easily be used as a more private option thanks to the latest iteration of Google's privacy settings. If you're willing to root your device, you can have the best of both the functionality and privacy worlds. That only applies to motivated and reasonably tech savvy users of course, out of the box iOS is still the better privacy option.
  - theshrike79 7y ago
    If you can root your device, so can the bad guys.
    - post_below 7y ago
      On iOS it's called jailbreaking. In either case it's been a long time since anyone came up with an exploit that could do it remotely.
- lern_too_spel 7y ago
  > Do they even let you disable location tracking any more? You're confusing iOS with Android. On iOS, every time you get your location, that location is also sent to Apple, and there is no way to disable this. Android's collection of this data is gated by a checkbox that is shown to every user on device setup.
  - tomc1985 7y ago
    Last time I used android there as no option for disabling location tracking as they had removed it a few major versions prior. Instead you had "enabled" and "kind of disabled, but not really" options
    - lern_too_spel 7y ago
      I have used Android devices since 1.0. They have all had the ability to disable location history and the ability to disable Google Location Services (under various names). Apple doesn't even give you the option of not sending GPS locations to Apple. If any app requests your location, Apple gets it too. https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT207056 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT207056
      - ex3ndr 7y ago
        That’s just not enough for disabling it on Android. I am working with androids even before 1.0, but does this really matter?
        lern_too_spel 7y ago
        > That’s just not enough for disabling it on Android. Citation needed. > I am working with androids even before 1.0, but does this really matter? It matters if I am claiming that there is no point at which GGP's statement was true, which I am. If I am not, GGP could say that the version of Android he used "last time [he] used Android" did not allow him to disable location collection and that it predates my experience with Android's location settings.
- couchridr 7y ago
  My favorite apple deceptive practice: allowing you to think you have disabled Bluetooth, when all you have disabled is Your Own ability to use it. Merchant partners of apple can use it to finely track you.
  - mirimir 7y ago
    Does that also apply to UWB?
matwood 7y ago
There is a plausible argument that Apple needed to give a little in order to avoid the creation of laws against any encryption. And/Or also avoid laws that required a backdoor to everything. I know I'm going to be called a fanboy or too generous to Apple, but given that the government has used every opportunity to call out Apple for not helping (when they have helped where they could) there is a line here that Apple is tip toeing around. I also do not think this as bad as you are making it out to be. Apple has always been clear what is fully E2E encrypted and what is not. This article is about something Apple planned to do and decided against. The reasons are what's important and the article only speculates.
- natch 7y ago
  What you say makes sense. Still, if that’s the case, then when they decided not to go down the user-is-in-full-and-absolute-control path for encryption of iCloud backups, they should have publicized it loudly and with extreme clarity on what exactly was happening and where the lines were. So that users could make informed choices.
  - Despegar 7y ago
    They have never hidden how iCloud backups or anything else related to iOS security works. This support document spells out clearly what data is end-to-end encrypted [1]. No one was actually misled into thinking all iCloud data was E2E. For one, most of Apple's customers don't know or care about the technical architecture of their products and services. The people who do would have known better when you can go to icloud.com and access your photos and files from a web browser. [1] https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202303 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202303
    - Proziam 7y ago
      Typical users who may care about privacy were definitely misled by Apple's public pro-security and pro-privacy stances. I have family who fall into that category. The difference between E2E and 'yup we're encrypted!' isn't understood by laypeople. Let's not do ourselves or the average folks out there a disservice by letting Apple off the hook for bad communication and the intentional misleading of users.
ken 7y ago
I don’t see how it’s a betrayal, as iCloud has never had E2EE, and Apple has never made any secret of this omission. Did we really think that Apple was just so incompetent they could run online file services for 20+ years and have almost a billion users, and not have encryption only because they hadn’t figured it out yet?
brlewis 7y ago
I have not bought into the meme and am not a huge Apple fan, but I think you can continue to if you wish. "Reuters could not determine why exactly Apple dropped the plan." It's possible that Apple didn't want the support costs of dealing with customers who lost/forgot whatever secret was to be used for encryption, and thus would have been unable to use their backups.
breatheoften 7y ago
Honestly I didn’t realize icloud backups were encrypted by a key Apple controls. I assumed they leveraged the same key sharing tech as iMessage ... I’m turning off iCloud backup — the only reason I have it on actually is to turn off the annoying backup nags. My photos are in iCloud, and so are my messages - I actually can’t think of anything valuable outside of those that I’d actually need iCloud backup for ... It doesn’t seem worth the risk
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

by natch 7y ago

tomc1985 7y ago

Yeah, but what are the reasonable alternatives? Android, with its freewheeling stance on privacy and app permissions? Do they even let you disable location tracking any more?

parthdesai 7y ago
No, but Android/Google doesn't go out and advertise themselves as a privacy first company.
- nicky0 7y ago
  I don't feel like being able to decrypt server backups on legal warrant completely destroys their stance of privacy focused. I mean if they started tracking your behavour and location, and mining it to better sell ads, maybe that would.
imiric 7y ago
Practically speaking there is no privacy in the digital world, unless you're willing to go full Stallman, or abandon modern society and go live in a mountain shack somewhere, and even there you'll have dozens of Starlink satellites overhead pretty soon. The best you can do if you're technically inclined is to use open source as much as possible (AOSP, postmarketOS, PureOS, etc.), minimize use of untrusted software and services (from all major corporations, no social media, no proprietary software in general), use network-level ad blockers, Tor if you think it helps, VPNs, encrypt everything, etc. And you'd still be tracked and profiled. If you're not technically savvy, forget about it. In either case if privacy is really a concern vote to elect politicians that are willing to enact laws that regulate the way companies can use personal data. Though considering both companies and governments benefit from the status quo, I don't foresee things improving in the near future, barring some kind of revolution where the majority wakes up, which is also unlikely. If the Snowden revelations didn't do it, I doubt anything will. So much for fighting 1984, Apple.
post_below 7y ago
Depending on what functionality you're willing to give up, an Android device can pretty easily be used as a more private option thanks to the latest iteration of Google's privacy settings. If you're willing to root your device, you can have the best of both the functionality and privacy worlds. That only applies to motivated and reasonably tech savvy users of course, out of the box iOS is still the better privacy option.
- theshrike79 7y ago
  If you can root your device, so can the bad guys.
  - post_below 7y ago
    On iOS it's called jailbreaking. In either case it's been a long time since anyone came up with an exploit that could do it remotely.
lern_too_spel 7y ago
> Do they even let you disable location tracking any more? You're confusing iOS with Android. On iOS, every time you get your location, that location is also sent to Apple, and there is no way to disable this. Android's collection of this data is gated by a checkbox that is shown to every user on device setup.
- tomc1985 7y ago
  Last time I used android there as no option for disabling location tracking as they had removed it a few major versions prior. Instead you had "enabled" and "kind of disabled, but not really" options
  - lern_too_spel 7y ago
    I have used Android devices since 1.0. They have all had the ability to disable location history and the ability to disable Google Location Services (under various names). Apple doesn't even give you the option of not sending GPS locations to Apple. If any app requests your location, Apple gets it too. https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT207056 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT207056
    - ex3ndr 7y ago
      That’s just not enough for disabling it on Android. I am working with androids even before 1.0, but does this really matter?
      - lern_too_spel 7y ago
        > That’s just not enough for disabling it on Android. Citation needed. > I am working with androids even before 1.0, but does this really matter? It matters if I am claiming that there is no point at which GGP's statement was true, which I am. If I am not, GGP could say that the version of Android he used "last time [he] used Android" did not allow him to disable location collection and that it predates my experience with Android's location settings.
couchridr 7y ago
My favorite apple deceptive practice: allowing you to think you have disabled Bluetooth, when all you have disabled is Your Own ability to use it. Merchant partners of apple can use it to finely track you.
- mirimir 7y ago
  Does that also apply to UWB?

matwood 7y ago

There is a plausible argument that Apple needed to give a little in order to avoid the creation of laws against any encryption. And/Or also avoid laws that required a backdoor to everything. I know I'm going to be called a fanboy or too generous to Apple, but given that the government has used every opportunity to call out Apple for not helping (when they have helped where they could) there is a line here that Apple is tip toeing around. I also do not think this as bad as you are making it out to be. Apple has always been clear what is fully E2E encrypted and what is not. This article is about something Apple planned to do and decided against. The reasons are what's important and the article only speculates.

natch 7y ago
What you say makes sense. Still, if that’s the case, then when they decided not to go down the user-is-in-full-and-absolute-control path for encryption of iCloud backups, they should have publicized it loudly and with extreme clarity on what exactly was happening and where the lines were. So that users could make informed choices.
- Despegar 7y ago
  They have never hidden how iCloud backups or anything else related to iOS security works. This support document spells out clearly what data is end-to-end encrypted [1]. No one was actually misled into thinking all iCloud data was E2E. For one, most of Apple's customers don't know or care about the technical architecture of their products and services. The people who do would have known better when you can go to icloud.com and access your photos and files from a web browser. [1] https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202303 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202303
  - Proziam 7y ago
    Typical users who may care about privacy were definitely misled by Apple's public pro-security and pro-privacy stances. I have family who fall into that category. The difference between E2E and 'yup we're encrypted!' isn't understood by laypeople. Let's not do ourselves or the average folks out there a disservice by letting Apple off the hook for bad communication and the intentional misleading of users.

ken 7y ago

I don’t see how it’s a betrayal, as iCloud has never had E2EE, and Apple has never made any secret of this omission. Did we really think that Apple was just so incompetent they could run online file services for 20+ years and have almost a billion users, and not have encryption only because they hadn’t figured it out yet?

brlewis 7y ago

I have not bought into the meme and am not a huge Apple fan, but I think you can continue to if you wish. "Reuters could not determine why exactly Apple dropped the plan." It's possible that Apple didn't want the support costs of dealing with customers who lost/forgot whatever secret was to be used for encryption, and thus would have been unable to use their backups.

breatheoften 7y ago

Honestly I didn’t realize icloud backups were encrypted by a key Apple controls. I assumed they leveraged the same key sharing tech as iMessage ... I’m turning off iCloud backup — the only reason I have it on actually is to turn off the annoying backup nags. My photos are in iCloud, and so are my messages - I actually can’t think of anything valuable outside of those that I’d actually need iCloud backup for ... It doesn’t seem worth the risk

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]