5 ms·

"The new policy was not formally announced but appeared sometime over the past few days on Apple's publicly available law enforcement guidelines. It follows the

"The new policy was not formally announced but appeared sometime over the past few days on Apple's publicly available law enforcement guidelines. It follows the revelation from Oregon Senator Ron Wyden that officials were requesting such data from Apple as well as from Google, the unit of Alphabet (GOOGL.O) that makes the operating system for Android phones." This sums up Apple's view on privacy. So essentially they were fine handing over the data without warrant until this was exposed. Now that it has gone public they are "revising" the process to make it inline with their competitor Google.

badkitty99 3y ago
[dead]
brookst 3y ago
I mean, what do you want? Should they dig their heels in and stick with the old policy out of some kind of refusal to admit mistakes? Companies get things wrong. Apple got this wrong. But, as they say, the best time to fix a mistake is before you make it, and the second best time is now.
- curt15 3y ago
  OP is probably just pointing out the incongruity of reality and Apple's sanctimonious attitude.
  - andsoitis 3y ago
    > Apple's sanctimonious attitude. Effective marketing.
nerdjon 3y ago
I feel like this is quite an over simplification. They can care about privacy all they want but if they are legally required to hand something over what are they realistically going to do? Really their only solution is to make everything end to end encrypted so it is impossible to comply (which they have been slowly making more and more components E2E), but that takes time to do. I honestly din't know how notifications could realistically be E2E since the source is not an Apple device so they can control it, but maybe it would be possible?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- ben_w 3y ago
  Even making everything E2E-encrypted doesn't stop any government saying "give us access or your executives go to jail and your products are banned from sale".
  - datadrivenangel 3y ago
    End to End encryption means that illegal or covert surveillance is impossible without more work from the company, which makes it easier to say "we can't give you access" when spooks show up. Obviously they can still send you to jail, but for this grey area "technically maybe kind of legal" surveillance execs at tech companies aren't going to jail for not complying if it's actually illegal.
  - saiya-jin 3y ago
    From most valued company in mankind's history, in US, in 2023? Keep dreaming, those people are not handled like mere humans, nor are those companies handled like some small family business. Nobody actually responsible went in jail for 2008 financial crisis and it would have been trivial to start pointing fingers at various culprits (but you would need many). Also banning Apple products in US would be a literal political suicide unless they would anger most of US population with something really really bad. From time to time somebody who wants free publicity for some political goals will venture on some small crusade but otherwise that's simply not how US handles its business currently.
    - ben_w 3y ago
      > From most valued company in mankind's history, in US, in 2023? Yes, because we live in the real world not a corporate cyberpunk dystopia where multinationals are stronger than nation states. There are many differences between the financial crisis and my hypothetical, but before I list them I will point out that banks were fined (and some ceased trading) and that people did go to jail: https://ig.ft.com/jailed-bankers/ https://ig.ft.com/jailed-bankers/ One of the bigger problems leading to the financial crisis is that people heard about the Black-Scholes equation, and the magic words "won the Nobel prize in economics" turned their brains off. Another big difference is that the governments understand the importance of money, while they very obviously don't understand the importance of encryption. Another is that the current zeitgeist is that Big Tech is too big and needs to be brought to heel — unlike the bankers, who by the GFC were all asking for (and getting) let off the leash they'd been given since one of the many previous financial crises. But rather than getting down in the weeds with these comparisons, I would end by noting that when you write: > Also banning Apple products in US would be a literal political suicide unless they would anger most of US population with something really really bad. You're assuming I meant the US government. Nope, there's about 200 sovereign nations in this world. Apple's products have suffered or been threatened with sales bans due to non-compliance with the laws in: • France: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/9/13/what-is-behind-frances-ban-of-apples-iphone-12 https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/9/13/what-is-behind-fran... • South Korea: https://www.crn.com/news/networking/220100939/south-korea-lifts-apple-iphone-ban https://www.crn.com/news/networking/220100939/south-korea-li... • Brazil: https://9to5mac.com/2022/10/13/apple-fine-in-brazil-iphone-charger https://9to5mac.com/2022/10/13/apple-fine-in-brazil-iphone-c... • Mexico: https://www.cultofmac.com/199452/local-firm-wins-its-case-to-get-the-iphone-banned-in-mexico/ https://www.cultofmac.com/199452/local-firm-wins-its-case-to... • Italy: https://www.corriere.it/economia/12_giugno_30/antitrust-apple-caso-rischio-multa_fa64dc5c-c2d0-11e1-a34b-90a1f1a78547.shtml https://www.corriere.it/economia/12_giugno_30/antitrust-appl... (At this point I stopped looking, Google had more search results). And also, despite what you say, the US: https://www.fiercebiotech.com/medtech/apple-watch-faces-another-possible-sales-ban-after-losing-itc-vote-masimo-pulse-oximetry https://www.fiercebiotech.com/medtech/apple-watch-faces-anot...
hulitu 3y ago
> This sums up Apple's view on privacy. They have the same policy on security. Flaws are discovered by Citizenlab and then fixed by Apple.
- tinus_hn 3y ago
  Bad Apple! They don’t even fix flaws they don’t know about!
bhpm 3y ago
> So essentially they were fine handing over the data without warrant until this was exposed. They were required by law to both hand over the data and not say anything about it. Furthermore, disabuse yourself of the notion this instant that you are safe from being spied on by state actors. You are never anonymous on the Internet.
- SamoyedFurFluff 3y ago
  Source that they are required to hand over data without a warrant? Genuinely asking
  - bhpm 3y ago
    > As with all of the other information these companies store for or about their users, because Apple and Google deliver push notification data, they can be secretly compelled by governments to hand over this information. https://www.wyden.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/wyden_smartphone_push_notification_surveillance_letter.pdf https://www.wyden.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/wyden_smartphone_...
    - Volundr 3y ago
      That doesn't say anything about without a warrant. Remember, Google required a judge to sign an order. Until this policy change Apple did not.
    - Detrytus 3y ago
      "Secretly compelled" sounds illegal on the government side. In democracy if government wants to force you to do something they should go through official, due process, i.e. court warrant.
      - HumblyTossed 3y ago
        > "Secretly compelled" We have a literal Secret Court in the U.S. for just this purpose. Everything done in there is and stays a secret.
HumblyTossed 3y ago
Apple was able to find a flaw in the system and patched it. Yay Apple?
tinus_hn 3y ago
Now that the publicly available guidelines were exposed, they changed and Apple didn’t even send a notification to every journalist in the known universe. Time to gather the tin foil hats!
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

badkitty99 3y ago

[dead]

brookst 3y ago

I mean, what do you want? Should they dig their heels in and stick with the old policy out of some kind of refusal to admit mistakes? Companies get things wrong. Apple got this wrong. But, as they say, the best time to fix a mistake is before you make it, and the second best time is now.

curt15 3y ago
OP is probably just pointing out the incongruity of reality and Apple's sanctimonious attitude.
- andsoitis 3y ago
  > Apple's sanctimonious attitude. Effective marketing.

nerdjon 3y ago

I feel like this is quite an over simplification. They can care about privacy all they want but if they are legally required to hand something over what are they realistically going to do? Really their only solution is to make everything end to end encrypted so it is impossible to comply (which they have been slowly making more and more components E2E), but that takes time to do. I honestly din't know how notifications could realistically be E2E since the source is not an Apple device so they can control it, but maybe it would be possible?

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
ben_w 3y ago
Even making everything E2E-encrypted doesn't stop any government saying "give us access or your executives go to jail and your products are banned from sale".
- datadrivenangel 3y ago
  End to End encryption means that illegal or covert surveillance is impossible without more work from the company, which makes it easier to say "we can't give you access" when spooks show up. Obviously they can still send you to jail, but for this grey area "technically maybe kind of legal" surveillance execs at tech companies aren't going to jail for not complying if it's actually illegal.
- saiya-jin 3y ago
  From most valued company in mankind's history, in US, in 2023? Keep dreaming, those people are not handled like mere humans, nor are those companies handled like some small family business. Nobody actually responsible went in jail for 2008 financial crisis and it would have been trivial to start pointing fingers at various culprits (but you would need many). Also banning Apple products in US would be a literal political suicide unless they would anger most of US population with something really really bad. From time to time somebody who wants free publicity for some political goals will venture on some small crusade but otherwise that's simply not how US handles its business currently.
  - ben_w 3y ago
    > From most valued company in mankind's history, in US, in 2023? Yes, because we live in the real world not a corporate cyberpunk dystopia where multinationals are stronger than nation states. There are many differences between the financial crisis and my hypothetical, but before I list them I will point out that banks were fined (and some ceased trading) and that people did go to jail: https://ig.ft.com/jailed-bankers/ https://ig.ft.com/jailed-bankers/ One of the bigger problems leading to the financial crisis is that people heard about the Black-Scholes equation, and the magic words "won the Nobel prize in economics" turned their brains off. Another big difference is that the governments understand the importance of money, while they very obviously don't understand the importance of encryption. Another is that the current zeitgeist is that Big Tech is too big and needs to be brought to heel — unlike the bankers, who by the GFC were all asking for (and getting) let off the leash they'd been given since one of the many previous financial crises. But rather than getting down in the weeds with these comparisons, I would end by noting that when you write: > Also banning Apple products in US would be a literal political suicide unless they would anger most of US population with something really really bad. You're assuming I meant the US government. Nope, there's about 200 sovereign nations in this world. Apple's products have suffered or been threatened with sales bans due to non-compliance with the laws in: • France: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/9/13/what-is-behind-frances-ban-of-apples-iphone-12 https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/9/13/what-is-behind-fran... • South Korea: https://www.crn.com/news/networking/220100939/south-korea-lifts-apple-iphone-ban https://www.crn.com/news/networking/220100939/south-korea-li... • Brazil: https://9to5mac.com/2022/10/13/apple-fine-in-brazil-iphone-charger https://9to5mac.com/2022/10/13/apple-fine-in-brazil-iphone-c... • Mexico: https://www.cultofmac.com/199452/local-firm-wins-its-case-to-get-the-iphone-banned-in-mexico/ https://www.cultofmac.com/199452/local-firm-wins-its-case-to... • Italy: https://www.corriere.it/economia/12_giugno_30/antitrust-apple-caso-rischio-multa_fa64dc5c-c2d0-11e1-a34b-90a1f1a78547.shtml https://www.corriere.it/economia/12_giugno_30/antitrust-appl... (At this point I stopped looking, Google had more search results). And also, despite what you say, the US: https://www.fiercebiotech.com/medtech/apple-watch-faces-another-possible-sales-ban-after-losing-itc-vote-masimo-pulse-oximetry https://www.fiercebiotech.com/medtech/apple-watch-faces-anot...

hulitu 3y ago

> This sums up Apple's view on privacy. They have the same policy on security. Flaws are discovered by Citizenlab and then fixed by Apple.

tinus_hn 3y ago
Bad Apple! They don’t even fix flaws they don’t know about!

bhpm 3y ago

> So essentially they were fine handing over the data without warrant until this was exposed. They were required by law to both hand over the data and not say anything about it. Furthermore, disabuse yourself of the notion this instant that you are safe from being spied on by state actors. You are never anonymous on the Internet.

SamoyedFurFluff 3y ago
Source that they are required to hand over data without a warrant? Genuinely asking
- bhpm 3y ago
  > As with all of the other information these companies store for or about their users, because Apple and Google deliver push notification data, they can be secretly compelled by governments to hand over this information. https://www.wyden.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/wyden_smartphone_push_notification_surveillance_letter.pdf https://www.wyden.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/wyden_smartphone_...
  - Volundr 3y ago
    That doesn't say anything about without a warrant. Remember, Google required a judge to sign an order. Until this policy change Apple did not.
  - Detrytus 3y ago
    "Secretly compelled" sounds illegal on the government side. In democracy if government wants to force you to do something they should go through official, due process, i.e. court warrant.
    - HumblyTossed 3y ago
      > "Secretly compelled" We have a literal Secret Court in the U.S. for just this purpose. Everything done in there is and stays a secret.

HumblyTossed 3y ago

Apple was able to find a flaw in the system and patched it. Yay Apple?

tinus_hn 3y ago

Now that the publicly available guidelines were exposed, they changed and Apple didn’t even send a notification to every journalist in the known universe. Time to gather the tin foil hats!

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]