26 ms·
Apple’s Anti-Tracking Plans for iPhone
- baybal2 6y agoWhy the IDFA was a thing in the first place? What I heard was that at some point of time, Apple had an ambition for own advertising business.
- madeofpalk 6y agoMy impression was that IDFA was a concession provided by Apple a while ago when they restricted APIs to the stable device identifiers. The IDFA was an identifier that advertisers could use and could be controlled by the user, which was seen as a privacy improvement on advertisers just using the device serial number. I could be very much wrong, but this was my understanding.
- user-the-name 6y agoThat is correct. The IDFA is a compromise to get rid of older, more invasive tracking methods that ad networks used. Apple blocked access to the more sensitive data, and instead provided the IDFA which allows users to opt out, and limits the ability to combine data from different sources. Making the IDFA opt in is now a second, stronger step towards user privacy.
- ratww 6y agoYep. Before IDFA, apps had access to the device's UDID. In the past you could get it by using this code: [[UIDevice mainDevice] uniqueIdentifier] It was deprecated in iOS 5. [1] [1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/227590/unique-identifier-for-an-iphone-app#comment10515560_227654 https://stackoverflow.com/questions/227590/unique-identifier...
- rgbrenner 6y agohttps://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/10/ask-ars-whats-the-difference-between-the-old-and-new-tracking-systems-on-ios/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/10/ask-ars-whats-the-di...
- izacus 6y agoGo to your iOS 14 device settings and you'll find out that Apples own behavioural tracking is still there, still on by default. It's now just split away from IDFA. Basically Apple is using this to attack competitors while leaving their own tracking on by default.
- TheKarateKid 6y ago> What I heard was that at some point of time, Apple had an ambition for own advertising business. Yes. Let's not forget about iAd and iBeacon, where Apple was traveling down the same road as FB and Google.
- BlueTemplar 6y agoAs a reminder, most popular Android apps send data to Facebook : https://9to5google.com/2018/12/31/android-apps-facebook/ https://9to5google.com/2018/12/31/android-apps-facebook/
- niea_11 6y agoYou can see a list of apps that share you activity with facebook here (even if you didn't install any facebook app on your phone or didn't use facebook login feature) : https://www.facebook.com/off_facebook_activity/activity_list https://www.facebook.com/off_facebook_activity/activity_list (click "Manage Your Off-Facebook Activity" on the right if you're on desktop)
- lvass 6y agoThis requires a facebook account, though they likely do have data from those not registered.
- notRobot 6y agoThey absolutely do, and it sucks that there's no way to view it or request deletion.
- robin_reala 6y agoSure there is. If they’re holding personal data on you, they legally have to provide it (and optionally delete it) when issued with a Subject Access Request under GDPR.
- tleb_ 6y agoI have tried requesting personal data from one company. They quickly said they didn't have anything associated with me; I believe it's just identified by an id that I don't know and that isn't linked directly to myself. I wouldn't be surprised if they did not link email addresses (and other user-accessible identifiers such as a phone number) anymore just to avoid having to give you your data if you request it.
- zpeti 6y agoI genuine question I don’t know the answer to, what’s better, seeing completely random ads that are questionably relevant, and wasting my attention and time (and meaning specialized small businesses can’t compete, ads are for things like detergent that everyone needs), or seeing ads that I might actually be interested at some point (some cool gadget that actually could be relevant to my life, sold by a specialist small manufacturer). I don’t know the answer. But Apple is picking for me, that’s for sure. Edit: good replies, fair point on the choice, from a personal perspective. We all know though that 90% will opt out or more. Without knowing they are making this very choice.
- vatican_banker 6y agofrom the article: > Apple [...] will give consumers the option to opt-out of tracking in each app Apple is giving you the option to choose.
- user-the-name 6y agoThey are literally not picking for you. They are specifically changing from opt-out to opt-in, meaning they are giving you more choice.
- robin_reala 6y agoYou missed out the third option, which is ads relevent to the content they’re embedded in. This metaphor worked from 300 years ago through to 15 years ago with no problems.
- stinos 6y agoOr the fourth one, no ads? I might be the minority but ads are wasted on me anyway (apart from the annoyance of seeing them).
- CubsFan1060 6y agoI think this is an interesting option. However, people who write newspaper articles, etc.. still need to get paid. I think we all say "I'd like to be able to pay just for the articles I want to read", but just like a la carte TV, I think we'd find out that is much more expensive than we know. My theory is that, collectively, our privacy and attention is worth far more to other people that to us. Making up numbers, a company may pay $1 to show a targeted ad to you while you are reading an article. But there is no way that you'd ever pay $1 to read that article. And, furthermore, you probably see viewing that ad as a minor annoyance, not $1 worth of value. I think if most folks had to replace ad money out of their own pocket in order to consume the content they like, they'd never do it.
- Havoc 6y agoTo what extent are iPhones fingerprinted though? As we’ve seen with websites even no unique id is not necessarily game over
- user-the-name 6y agoApple generally blocks access to or obscures any data that could be used for fingerprinting in apps.
- hu3 6y agoYou can test your device browser fingerprint here: https://coveryourtracks.eff.org https://coveryourtracks.eff.org
- jb1991 6y agoOne thing I've never understood about fingerprinting is that Firefox is supposed to prevent it by mangling the fingerprint data if you have those settings turned on. However whenever I visit sites like this, they all those the same thing that never changes, which means my fingerprint is quite stable and shared easily.
- est31 6y agoFirefox's fingerprinting protections are useful, but they are not enough to prevent fingerprinting altogether.
- canofbars 6y agoThe problem with all these anti-fingerprinting tools is you show up as a firefox user who went in to the settings and turned on fingerprint protections which no other user did so you are unique again. You need lots of users to have the same setting enabled to blend in.
- dan-robertson 6y agoI suspect that a few of the things in that report are more correlated than the report suggests.
- zpeti 6y agoI wonder if close to the deadline somehow Apple and Facebook agree on some sort of revenue sharing like with google search on safari. In return for using idfa. Apples been so focused on revenue recently this could easily be just a shakedown of fb.
- tonyedgecombe 6y agoI doubt it, that would be the opposite of their public message on privacy. For all the recent complaints about Apple it does appear they really do believe what they are saying in public.
- delusional 6y agoI don't know if they believe it. I think they see it has a good moat between them and google considering google has to kill their own profits to believably provide privacy. Apple seems to believe it will drive market share, and I think that's better than them believing in the principle (since public companies are not principle driven).
- intricatedetail 6y agoThe why is it opt-out?
- fouc 6y ago>Unfortunately, as you might imagine, a lot of advertisers, notably Facebook, were not happy with Apple. Facebook, which uses IDFA to track users’ activity across different apps and match them to advertising profiles, says that its advertising partners will be hit hard by this change. What about Google? Is Google also unhappy?
- romanovcode 6y agoGoogle is happy as long as google.com is the default search for Safari.
- qz2 6y agoI reckon Apple are working on a solution there...
- exhilaration 6y agoAnd give up $8-$12 billion of pure profit? https://www.businessinsider.com/google-apple-search-deal-doj-antitrust-suit-2020-10 https://www.businessinsider.com/google-apple-search-deal-doj...
- lvass 6y agoI would probably be happy if I were google. It's very, very unlikely they need IDFA to know whoever someone is so this gives them an edge over competition.
- ThePhysicist 6y agoIn Europe, cross-app, cross-browser & cross-device tracking is on very thin ice legally under the GDPR, so I'm not surprised Apple finally curbs the use of "sticky" identifiers on their devices. Honestly, it's a bit shameful that a device that is marketed as the gold standard in privacy would even support such an identifier in the first place, it has literally no purpose beyond mining peoples' data. Now that the third-party tracking ecosystem is slowly drying out I'm curious what advertisers will come up with to circumvent these new measures. Anyone here that works in the industry and wants to share some plans?
- mehrdada 6y agoI think it started as a compromise measure to hamper down on collection of other more persistent device identifiers (through AppStore regulation) so in a way it was a step in the right direction when introduced.
- endymi0n 6y agoHaving been on both sides of the table, I would slightly disagree here. Fraud prevention for example will get an order of magnitude harder, plus this move will further skew the playing field towards FAANG who have the resources to puzzle the scraps back together for decent conversion tracking with the help of logins, IPs, SDKs with First Party IDs and a massive dose of machine learning.
- lotsofpulp 6y agoI wonder if it would be profitable for Visa/Mastercard/Discover/AmEx to sell a verification service where people can authenticate with a $0.01 authorization or approval amount. Obviously, it wouldn't work with gift cards or other accounts not tied to a real person.
- rattray 6y agoAnd make stolen credit card numbers even more valuable? (I like where your head is at, fraud is just hard)
- encom 6y agoSupport Free software instead, and stop begging Apple for permission to control what happens on hardware you own.
- user-the-name 6y agoWhat free software phones are there that actually take steps to prevent tracking? Most free software OSes I know about generally give apps lots of access to the system they are running on, which makes tracking a lot easier.
- auslegung 6y agoPinePhone, Libre phone to name two. I’m guessing there are some android ROMs that could do this as well but not positive
- user-the-name 6y agoWhat specific steps do they take to stop tracking?
- fsflover 6y agohttps://source.puri.sm/Librem5/community-wiki/-/wikis/Frequently-Asked-Questions#11-why-buy-the-librem-5 https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/community-wiki/-/wikis/Freque...
- user-the-name 6y agoI don't even see the issue of preventing third-party apps from tracking you addressed on that page, and that is exactly my worry with these kinds of projects: It is not clear to me that they even know what the threat model is. They do not seem to focus at all on the largest issues facing modern phone app ecosystems.
- 6y ago
- holstvoogd 6y agohmmm.. What is up with that hidden NewsletterSignup checkbox? Better not start sending me emails mozilla :P
- floatingatoll 6y agoPerhaps a content blocker decided to hide it for you? I see a visible, default-unchecked checkbox with the label “I want to receive email updates about Mozilla’s campaigns”, directly above the “Add My Name” button.
- hakre 6y agoLooks like Mozilla still ignores the memo that anti-tracking starts with anti DRM in the first place. Apple your new friend. State of the art data protection looks different. Mozilla ain't asking for help for that thought. How unfortunate!
- gfxgirl 6y agoI think removing the IDFA is great but .... most people probably login via the same IDs, either the same email address or facebook login, google login, github login, etc... Once you've done that your app activity will be exchanged behind the scenes associating your data with your email or account so I'm not sure how many people this is going to really help. IIRC Apple was trying to fix this hole too by having login via Apple give each app a different user IDs. Unfortunately that's not useful for the majority of people who need to be able to use non Apple devices.
- floatingatoll 6y agoApple doesn’t need to fix this for users who aren’t using Apple devices. However: The privacy feature of “Sign In With Apple” uses an email address for each service that you can use to access your accounts from other non-Apple devices, as long as the site implements a Reset Password process that accepts account email addresses (which virtually all do). The private email addresses are under Settings > iCloud > Apps Using Apple ID for apps where you hide your email.
- gfxgirl 6y agoYou're assuming people use exclusively Apple devices. I'm assuming people have a mix like a Window machine at work or a Chromebook from school etc.... I can use Apple devices and still have the need to use non-apple devices so Apple's solution isn't helpful.
- floatingatoll 6y agoIf you have enough Apple devices to set up and configure Sign In With Apple, and you're interested in using the account with non-Apple devices, then using the Reset Password process to have a password assigned to your account generally has not — in my experience — impacted Sign In With Apple, which simply continues to work regardless. I have been able to use this process to sign in across Apple and Windows and etc without difficulty. What's uncertain here is whether each third-party will correctly handle this workflow. I can't decide if it's worked every time because I'm lucky or because there's a regulation somewhere in the Sign In With Apple terms that requires it. I respect that this uncertainty may not be acceptable to everyone.
- LC_ALL 6y agoSay what you want about Apple but they are by far the most privacy focused big company. Their income is from selling physical devices. Typical megacorps in 2020 are leveraging economies of scale to sell their users' attention. Apple has a unique value add in that when their users benefit they benefit. Sent from my Thinkpad.
- secondcoming 6y agoApple had its own advertising platform called iAd that was abandonded a few years ago. Cynical me thinks that them disabling the IDFA could be a ploy for them to corner the adtech market for themselves.
- confiq 6y agonow you have [Apple Search Ads](https://searchads.apple.com/ https://searchads.apple.com/) instead of iAd
- speedgoose 6y agoWhy don't they fully encrypt the icloud backups? Sent from my Huawei.
- tchalla 6y agoWhat do you think are the possible issues for full encryption of iCloud backups?
- dannyw 6y agoPressure from the FBI, according to Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-fbi-icloud-exclusive-idUSKBN1ZK1CT https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-fbi-icloud-exclusiv...
- EwanToo 6y agoThis is the issue with iCloud backups not being encrypted: https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-apple-fbi-icloud-exclusive/exclusive-apple-dropped-plan-for-encrypting-backups-after-fbi-complained-sources-idUKKBN1ZK1CT https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-apple-fbi-icloud-exclusive... Not saying I agree or disagree with it, but it's something worth highlighting
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- qwerty456127 6y agoIf this feature is going to be well-known and too easy to discover - it is already doomed. As soon as too many ordinary users start using it, advertisers will invest in workarounds. Ad blocking only worked well as long as the majority of people didn't care to use it. Ad blocking and privacy-enhancing features should be off by default, requiring you to dive deep into config dialogs to turn on so only those who actually worry about being tracked would use them - this way this can have a chance to actually work.
- canofbars 6y agoApple has a unique power here. They just add a line to their ToS stating that workarounds are a violation and your app will be removed.
- alisonkisk 6y agoFacebook does that too. How can they police secretly selling spy data?
- sidcool 6y agoSigned up and donated.
- saagarjha 6y ago> Apple plans to improve privacy on iPhone, but it’s already pushed back the implementation. We need a massive outpouring of support for Apple’s decision to help strengthen its resolve to protect consumer privacy. Tell Apple: I support your efforts to defend our privacy, and encourage you to implement the IDFA changes as soon as possible. Does anyone actually think that Apple cares at all about the few thousand people that leave their name here? Did the people writing this article think that?
- sudhirj 6y agoApple probably doesn’t care, but this is necessary to change the press landscape. Right now the narrative is Apple is doing things to hurt Facebook - a million people signing this will change that narrative.
- saagarjha 6y agoI don’t know…the optics of this make it look like a mildly pathetic beg for Apple to not back down on their anti-tracking efforts. I’m not sure Mozilla wants to look like that…
- bogomipz 6y ago>"In 2019, Mozilla called on Apple to increase user privacy by automatically resetting the Identifier for Advertisers (IDFA) on iPhones." Can anyone provide more context on this event? Is it not odd that Mozilla would call on Apple to "increase user privacy" when one of Mozilla's main(most important?) partners is Google which is the very antithesis of user privacy? Then further down the post states" >"That’s where you come in: We need a massive outpouring of support for Apple’s decision to help strengthen its resolve to protect consumer privacy." While I applaud these efforts I'm curious how does Mozilla reconcile taking hundreds of millions of dollars from Google while taking this principled stance on Apple? This seems to be a bit of cognitive dissonance.
- Contax 6y agoThe irony. The article's page loads content from various third-parties, including, you know, Google. Walk the talk and all that Mozilla.
- gotschi 6y agoFonts by Google, really?
- Contax 6y agoI don't get the downvotes. Did I insult or offend any Mozilla fans (which I am one BTW, even after some questionable decisions of late)? Am I wrong saying it's ironic to connect to Google -possibly the largest tracking company by far seeing they are present in almost every website out there- in an article praising anti-tracking measures? Is it bad to tell Mozilla to be more consistent with their message and actions? Wish people who downvote would at least take the time to tell what's wrong with the comment. I don't mind being corrected... quite the contrary!
- perryizgr8 6y agoYou're right. Firefox is basically an undercover agent for Google at this point. They are obsessively targeting FB for practices that Google is probably doing at a much greater scale.
- dancemethis 6y agoApple's alledged* plans. Apple would be just monopolizing the tracking market on the background for this.
- intricatedetail 6y agoShouldn't the tracking be opt-in? It's a shame that GDPR was not extended to electronic devices.
- philplckthun 6y ago> Sign this thank you to let Apple know consumers are eagerly anticipating anti-tracking protection on iPhone. I'll only sign a thank you like this when Apple allows other browsers engines on iOS, which is actual consumer-friendly behaviour towards the Web.
- flerchin 6y agoIt's not clear to me why IDFA was ever implemented. No user would want it.
- superkuh 6y agoApple can make an anti-tracking computer but nothing they do can make an anti-tracking phone. It is a "cell" phone. The very nature of cell phones means the basestations have to decide where you are and which cell takes your connections. With precise clocks and multi-lateration the position of your handset is known to about 50m. All US telco keep this location data (which is constantly updated) for 2 to 5 years. And they sell it too. No, there is no privacy oriented, no anti-tracking, cell phone. None of them are capable of this. And no amount of "privacy" functions in the user computer will make up for the intrinsic nature of cell phones. Because cell phones are so incredibly useful people bend over backwards mentally to try to ignore this. They get angry when it's pointed out because it's "irrelevant". But it isn't. This is real tracking of you. Far worse than any "internet" tracking.
- jmull 6y agoThis is about tracking your internet activity, not physical location/movements.
- snarf21 6y agoYour carrier has that correlation. They route all your packets. It doesn't matter if it is Comcast at home or Verizon/Att on the go. They know where you live and work and track you 24/7. Facebook is simply going to make a deal to have a unique ID added to URL metadata and then tracking is even more trivial. We need legislation to guarantee true net neutrality. Just like the electric company doesn't track/sell what I use my electricity on, the ISP shouldn't track/sell what I use my data.
- jmull 6y agoWell, if you want to protect yourself you should understand this in more detail. At minimum you should be using https. Your ISP could generally know the domains you are communicating with (when and how much), but not about what. They also could not add metadata to requests. The ad tracking we're talking about in this post really needs those details, so the ISP isn't in a position to enable the kind of tracking Apple is blocking here. You can go further and use a VPN. Then all your ISP knows is that you use a VPN, but would not be able to tell anything else. Of course, you need to trust your VPN provider (including to properly secure their service), but if you're paying for one, at least your interests are aligned. (You pay your ISP, but they operate as semi monopolies and your privacy is not their primary business concern, so your interests don't really align that well.) I agree about not allowing ISPs to sell data, though I think it would be OK if properly anonymized.
- naringas 6y agoAll in all, what they are really accomplishing is making it harder and more techinacally difficult to track individual people. i.e. NOT impossible. In the end, given enough money (or lacking enough scruples) it will still be possible to track individuals as a service, but it'll be more expensive because it has been made difficult by 'privacy-first' initiatives such as this. So that finally, only very very large companies and governments can really afford to do this.
- HomeDeLaPot 6y agoI still want a phone with an open software ecosystem, so I'm excited that the Pinephone and Librem 5 exist. But I'm glad that Apple has been able to at least make privacy a selling point of their products. That's the way it should be.
- cheaprentalyeti 6y agoMaybe all the advertisers should just rename their tracking software "Contact Tracing For The Duration of the Covid Crisis" instead.
- j45 6y agoI had read that whole apple was locking down external ad networks and trackers, but tracking thru the Apple ads program would be still allowed.
- mark_l_watson 6y agoApple is the best huge corporation when it comes to protecting user rights. I would have gone “all in Linux and alternative phones” if not for Apple’s current policies. They would lose me as a customer if they change, but I don’t expect them to do that.
- mqus 6y agoYou mean like the right to repair? Or do you mean the user rights on your iOS device, not allowing you to install stuff from outside the app store?
- mark_l_watson 6y agoI think they are awe full for right to repair, but, really pretty good at protecting their customers’ privacy.
- drosan 6y agoI can see some of that stuff from inside / other side; article is actually incredibly naive. Apple's apptrack restrictions in reality have nothing to do with users privacy, it is a simple measure to get a slice (or the whole thing) of an advertising pie from Facebook and other giants. IDFA on iPhones is simply being replaced with SKAD network profiles, effectively managed by Apple and that's it. So now the whole ios traffic/ads business will be controlled not by facebook/others but by Apple.
- fbelzile 6y agoI don't want to minimize Apple's efforts on privacy, but this is only happening because the Overton window on privacy is finally shifting. Let's not pretend that Apple 'cares' all of a sudden. They only 'care' because it's a convenient position for them to take. Their business model isn't directly tied to the collection of data, which allows them to differentiate themselves from Google and make surgical changes like this. I propose we ask Apple to go further: If Apple really cared, they'd make IDFA opt-in only. Why are we now applauding the option to disable a feature that the EU deemed illegal from the start? [1] If Apple really cared, they'd remove Google as the default search engine and forgo the $8-12 billion they make from Google. Then, allow a fair bid for privacy focused search engines (or make their own). [2] If Apple really cared, they'd stop tracking you in Apple Services like Apple TV+ and stop sharing your data with third parties. [3] [1] https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/what-is-apples-idfa-and-why-is-it-at-the-centre-of-privacy-dispute/article33156045.ece https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/what-is-apples-... [2] https://www.macrumors.com/2020/10/25/google-apple-search-default-8-12-billion/ https://www.macrumors.com/2020/10/25/google-apple-search-def... [3] https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208511 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208511
- skc 6y agoIt's highly likely that a majority of the PC's and smartphones used by employees at Facebook HQ are made by Apple. Delicious.
- samoa42 6y agothere was some fallout with apple in late 2018 and zuckerberg allegedly ordered facebook employes to use android instead.
- api 6y agoThis sort of thing is one of the big factors that keeps me on Apple's platform in spite of other things I don't like about it.
- diebeforei485 6y agoI'm glad Apple is doing this, and I have no idea why they haven't done it yet. They announced it in June.
- TedShiller 6y agoWhy don’t companies just use browser fingerprinting?
- ogre_codes 6y agoAdvertisers: The app eco-system would not exist without tracking!!! Reality: Commercial and free software has existed for 70 years and ad supported software only arrived in the past 20 years. The app/ software market will do just fine without tracking.
- raxxorrax 6y agoOnly 15 years ago it was very unlikely an app phoned home. It was seen as a violation of trust. I hate those that changed this. They made confidential communication unfeasible for the vast majority of people without creating a benefit.
- demadog 6y agoTech cos will always be a few steps ahead of regulators. Cookies get restricted, so then OS fingerprinting gets rolled out. Cat and mouse game!
- neop1x 6y agoCan they also remove fbclid and similar garbage from URLs? I am tired of deleting that manually every time I want to share something.
- matty22 6y agoIt's funny how a form on a Mozilla website asking you to add your voice to the chorus pushing Apple to move forward with the IDFA privacy changes has a form that asks for your first name, last name, email address, and country. None of which are optional...