6 ms·

I don't know how Apple has managed to get the image of a "privacy friendly" company while painting Google as "privacy unfriendly" at the same time. Apple is bet

I don't know how Apple has managed to get the image of a "privacy friendly" company while painting Google as "privacy unfriendly" at the same time. Apple is better than Google, but mostly because they can't gather as much data about you as Google does (this is not related to iOS vs Android; it's about how pervasive Google is on the WWW), and that's about all the practical differences between the two. And on iOS, Apple is also just one silent App Store update away from being able to exploit your data, not very different from Android. Even if I consider Google enemy #1 right now, I also don't really see them as privacy unfriendly. They have a shitton of data, but what have they exactly done with it that warrants the moniker? Microsoft seems to me to be much more privacy unfriendly (e.g., LinkedIn)

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
handrous 5y ago
> Even if I consider Google enemy #1 right now, I also don't really see them as privacy unfriendly. They have a shitton of data, but what have they exactly done with it that warrants the moniker? Microsoft seems to me to be much more privacy unfriendly (e.g., LinkedIn) Collecting and having that data to begin with is awful & dangerous. The behavior of collecting it is creepy and gross. The existence of the collected data is threatening.
- AshamedCaptain 5y ago
  The reason I consider Google a public enemy is not because they collect data or have a poor privacy policy or whatever (because I don't think they are particularly bad at that). The reason is because I think they are "unavoidable". It's very hard to do anything online without it leaving a fingerprint on some Google server. Even governments seem to be ready to endorse Google services (e.g. recaptcha, Android) for fulfillment of basic services. Apple, Facebook, etc. may have (or not have) worse privacy policy, but it is much easier to avoid leaving fingerprints on their servers. Amazon & Microsoft are on the other hand particularly dangerous, though.
  - cgio 5y ago
    You hit a nerve. I have to go through two reCaptchas to prove that I am not a robot so that I can pay my children’s school activities. Why would they care if I am a robot that wants to pay them? For some time checking in for COVID in NSW Aus took 3 reCaptchas if you were in private mode on your browser. Similar in many government services where they are pervasive and injected right in the middle of potentially very private workflows.
    - leesalminen 5y ago
      > Why would they care if I am a robot that wants to pay them? I’ve seen scammers find obscure payment portals and run through a bunch of card numbers to see if they approve/deny. Recaptcha prevents that. It’s obviously not the only way, but it’s low dev effort and it works.
      - withinboredom 5y ago
        This is an easy fix. Just require being signed in and only allow payment with a valid child attached to the account. You can allow anonymous payments only if you have a valid child account code.
    - MertsA 5y ago
      >Why would they care if I am a robot that wants to pay them? Because payment systems that allow for cheap transactions are often leveraged to test stolen credit card data before making a transaction in person.
gpanders 5y ago
It’s not just marketing fluff though, Apple actually is better from a privacy perspective on many fronts: - iMessage is E2EE (with a big asterisk here of course) - Maps data stays on device unless you explicitly enable anonymous aggregated crowd sharing data. “Significant locations” never leaves your device - Apple Photos machine learning recognition all happens on device, not on Apple servers. This is one of my favorite features of my iPhone - As of the next iOS update, Siri voice command processing happens on device - The new Apple Private Relay (or whatever it’s called) No they’re not perfect and they could (and should) do a lot more, but there are objective things that they do better from a privacy standpoint than most other tech companies.
- azinman2 5y ago
  Working for Apple, I can say that privacy pervades every discussion of every feature. It’s not just fluff.
  - dcow 5y ago
    Do you have any insight on how other employees feel about this system? I'm sure it's all over the place but anything that stands out?
  - ncmncm 5y ago
    What you mean is that privacy policy is above your pay grade. Everything below can be compromised by one choice at the top.
    - dev_tty01 5y ago
      No it can't. Someone has to implement that choice. It would be visible to the technical staff.
      - jrm4 5y ago
        Sure...but: “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” Upton Sinclair
dcow 5y ago
This one is annoying to me. I'm pretty sure Apple literally paid for that reputation. They just started marketing themselves as privacy focused a few years ago and everyone slurped it up. What's annoying about it? Well beyond them milking the privacy wave, I do believe that at a hardware and system software level Apple did outplay the competition for a very long time. Keychain, Secure enclave, biometric auth, secure boot, signed binaries, pointer auth, etc. They've pushed the state of the art in regards to those technologies making it into consumer hands and did it better than anybody else. So it's somewhat justified. But then they milked it and because the left hand doesn't know what the right is doing, are now taking a complete 180 "for the kids".
- bdfgrssd 5y ago
  With the exception of Keychain and Biometric auth, everything you mentioned ultimately benefits the party that controls the trust root on the device (apple) significantly more than the user of the device. At least with the right Android device I can flash my own keys to the trust root.
  - dcow 5y ago
    Sure but it also is good security. I too would prefer Apple to let me flash my own trust root. Doesn't mean the tech isn’t valid and security/privacy centric just because Apple uses it to lock their platform down.
- jjoonathan 5y ago
  You say that they just paid for the reputation through marketing, but then you list ways that they earned it. You can't have it both ways. Of course, now they've gone and un-earned the reputation. Too bad.
  - dcow 5y ago
    No what I’m saying is it’s annoying me because they’ve both earned the reputation and also marketed the hell out of it. Apple seems to want it both ways then they go and do this.
Spooky23 5y ago
Most of the commentators are upset because they don’t understand cloud and what it means. As an individual, once you provide data to a third party, you’ve lost exclusive control, period. How you feel about a company is just a feeling. With respect to this Apple thing, it’s pretty clear that Apple thinks this is more respectful of privacy than what the other providers do. IMO, this is what allows E2E messaging to actually remain E2E. The EFF and some HN commenters are blending together the parental control aspect from the detection of illegal images aspect. They are two very different things. And when you talk about the reality of privacy, you can, trivially, turn off the the third party features that trigger the use of cloud services.
- vineyardmike 5y ago
  > you can, trivially, turn off the X This is rarely possible in the apple world for long
  - dev_tty01 5y ago
    With respect to privacy, history shows that Apple keeps adding more and more user control of privacy. Per app location, access to other data, location permission in the browser, tracking, forcing app disclosure of data collection, etc. Can you point me to a privacy related preference they have removed and not replaced with something else? I can't think of one.
    - vineyardmike 5y ago
      > Apple keeps adding more and more user control of privacy Against other tech companies. This whole debacle is a clear example where customers have no control. They can't even not update their device because its already there. I can actually name a privacy feature that they took a long time to replace: Siri voice recording accountability. Siri voice recordings were saved in the cloud. They were linked to your identity. If you GDPR'd apple they deleted these recordings. They stripped the identifiers. Then you can't GDPR them, and its arguably no more private. LATER they stopped saving them to the cloud (yay more private again!). To be clear: the voice recordings can identify you even without identifiers. Its your voice. You might say "how do i get too <work address> or <home adddress>. You might say "Hey siri, tell <secret lover> that i love them" and boom now that is out there. Lots of reason people want control there.
amelius 5y ago
> I don't know how Apple has managed to get the image of a "privacy friendly" company while painting Google as "privacy unfriendly" at the same time. I guess that's all about incentives. Since Google is an advertising company, it has most to gain by knowing your deepest personal info, i.e., so that it can "sell" this info to their customers.
taneq 5y ago
> They have a shitton of data, but what have they exactly done with it that warrants the moniker? Uh... they've aggressively gathered that data? If I take a bunch of photos of you sitting on the toilet, the concern isn't whether I've publicly done anything with those photos, it's that I took them in the first place.
Angostura 5y ago
> don't know how Apple has managed to get the image of a "privacy friendly" company while painting Google as "privacy unfriendly" at the same time. Apple is better than Google.. That's how.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

handrous 5y ago

> Even if I consider Google enemy #1 right now, I also don't really see them as privacy unfriendly. They have a shitton of data, but what have they exactly done with it that warrants the moniker? Microsoft seems to me to be much more privacy unfriendly (e.g., LinkedIn) Collecting and having that data to begin with is awful & dangerous. The behavior of collecting it is creepy and gross. The existence of the collected data is threatening.

AshamedCaptain 5y ago
The reason I consider Google a public enemy is not because they collect data or have a poor privacy policy or whatever (because I don't think they are particularly bad at that). The reason is because I think they are "unavoidable". It's very hard to do anything online without it leaving a fingerprint on some Google server. Even governments seem to be ready to endorse Google services (e.g. recaptcha, Android) for fulfillment of basic services. Apple, Facebook, etc. may have (or not have) worse privacy policy, but it is much easier to avoid leaving fingerprints on their servers. Amazon & Microsoft are on the other hand particularly dangerous, though.
- cgio 5y ago
  You hit a nerve. I have to go through two reCaptchas to prove that I am not a robot so that I can pay my children’s school activities. Why would they care if I am a robot that wants to pay them? For some time checking in for COVID in NSW Aus took 3 reCaptchas if you were in private mode on your browser. Similar in many government services where they are pervasive and injected right in the middle of potentially very private workflows.
  - leesalminen 5y ago
    > Why would they care if I am a robot that wants to pay them? I’ve seen scammers find obscure payment portals and run through a bunch of card numbers to see if they approve/deny. Recaptcha prevents that. It’s obviously not the only way, but it’s low dev effort and it works.
    - withinboredom 5y ago
      This is an easy fix. Just require being signed in and only allow payment with a valid child attached to the account. You can allow anonymous payments only if you have a valid child account code.
  - MertsA 5y ago
    >Why would they care if I am a robot that wants to pay them? Because payment systems that allow for cheap transactions are often leveraged to test stolen credit card data before making a transaction in person.

gpanders 5y ago

It’s not just marketing fluff though, Apple actually is better from a privacy perspective on many fronts: - iMessage is E2EE (with a big asterisk here of course) - Maps data stays on device unless you explicitly enable anonymous aggregated crowd sharing data. “Significant locations” never leaves your device - Apple Photos machine learning recognition all happens on device, not on Apple servers. This is one of my favorite features of my iPhone - As of the next iOS update, Siri voice command processing happens on device - The new Apple Private Relay (or whatever it’s called) No they’re not perfect and they could (and should) do a lot more, but there are objective things that they do better from a privacy standpoint than most other tech companies.

azinman2 5y ago
Working for Apple, I can say that privacy pervades every discussion of every feature. It’s not just fluff.
- dcow 5y ago
  Do you have any insight on how other employees feel about this system? I'm sure it's all over the place but anything that stands out?
- ncmncm 5y ago
  What you mean is that privacy policy is above your pay grade. Everything below can be compromised by one choice at the top.
  - dev_tty01 5y ago
    No it can't. Someone has to implement that choice. It would be visible to the technical staff.
    - jrm4 5y ago
      Sure...but: “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” Upton Sinclair

dcow 5y ago

This one is annoying to me. I'm pretty sure Apple literally paid for that reputation. They just started marketing themselves as privacy focused a few years ago and everyone slurped it up. What's annoying about it? Well beyond them milking the privacy wave, I do believe that at a hardware and system software level Apple did outplay the competition for a very long time. Keychain, Secure enclave, biometric auth, secure boot, signed binaries, pointer auth, etc. They've pushed the state of the art in regards to those technologies making it into consumer hands and did it better than anybody else. So it's somewhat justified. But then they milked it and because the left hand doesn't know what the right is doing, are now taking a complete 180 "for the kids".

bdfgrssd 5y ago
With the exception of Keychain and Biometric auth, everything you mentioned ultimately benefits the party that controls the trust root on the device (apple) significantly more than the user of the device. At least with the right Android device I can flash my own keys to the trust root.
- dcow 5y ago
  Sure but it also is good security. I too would prefer Apple to let me flash my own trust root. Doesn't mean the tech isn’t valid and security/privacy centric just because Apple uses it to lock their platform down.
jjoonathan 5y ago
You say that they just paid for the reputation through marketing, but then you list ways that they earned it. You can't have it both ways. Of course, now they've gone and un-earned the reputation. Too bad.
- dcow 5y ago
  No what I’m saying is it’s annoying me because they’ve both earned the reputation and also marketed the hell out of it. Apple seems to want it both ways then they go and do this.

Spooky23 5y ago

Most of the commentators are upset because they don’t understand cloud and what it means. As an individual, once you provide data to a third party, you’ve lost exclusive control, period. How you feel about a company is just a feeling. With respect to this Apple thing, it’s pretty clear that Apple thinks this is more respectful of privacy than what the other providers do. IMO, this is what allows E2E messaging to actually remain E2E. The EFF and some HN commenters are blending together the parental control aspect from the detection of illegal images aspect. They are two very different things. And when you talk about the reality of privacy, you can, trivially, turn off the the third party features that trigger the use of cloud services.

vineyardmike 5y ago
> you can, trivially, turn off the X This is rarely possible in the apple world for long
- dev_tty01 5y ago
  With respect to privacy, history shows that Apple keeps adding more and more user control of privacy. Per app location, access to other data, location permission in the browser, tracking, forcing app disclosure of data collection, etc. Can you point me to a privacy related preference they have removed and not replaced with something else? I can't think of one.
  - vineyardmike 5y ago
    > Apple keeps adding more and more user control of privacy Against other tech companies. This whole debacle is a clear example where customers have no control. They can't even not update their device because its already there. I can actually name a privacy feature that they took a long time to replace: Siri voice recording accountability. Siri voice recordings were saved in the cloud. They were linked to your identity. If you GDPR'd apple they deleted these recordings. They stripped the identifiers. Then you can't GDPR them, and its arguably no more private. LATER they stopped saving them to the cloud (yay more private again!). To be clear: the voice recordings can identify you even without identifiers. Its your voice. You might say "how do i get too <work address> or <home adddress>. You might say "Hey siri, tell <secret lover> that i love them" and boom now that is out there. Lots of reason people want control there.

amelius 5y ago

> I don't know how Apple has managed to get the image of a "privacy friendly" company while painting Google as "privacy unfriendly" at the same time. I guess that's all about incentives. Since Google is an advertising company, it has most to gain by knowing your deepest personal info, i.e., so that it can "sell" this info to their customers.

taneq 5y ago

> They have a shitton of data, but what have they exactly done with it that warrants the moniker? Uh... they've aggressively gathered that data? If I take a bunch of photos of you sitting on the toilet, the concern isn't whether I've publicly done anything with those photos, it's that I took them in the first place.

Angostura 5y ago

> don't know how Apple has managed to get the image of a "privacy friendly" company while painting Google as "privacy unfriendly" at the same time. Apple is better than Google.. That's how.