Apple Aims for Greater Transparency With Comprehensive New Privacy Site

[cmaier]

They didn't say they are 100 percent secure. They simply listed precisely what they do in order to try and be that secure. There are many security precautions that could additionally be taken that they do not list. They don't say that email remains encrypted using only keys known to the sender and receiver and no one else (because that wouldn't be true). THey don't say that their servers are immune from DPA attacks (because that wouldn't be true). There are lots of apparent ways your data could be intercepted. But what apple has done is come forward in a way it's competitors have not and given us precise information that we can use to evaluate the risks.

Do we believe this story 100%

So any terrorist around the world should be using Apple products, as Apple have now stated they are 100% secure and impossible to be spied on?

That's the story, yes?

 

[iWe]

In closing, what search engines are you using now that plays along with this apple privacy?

www.duckduckgo.com

DuckDuckGo is the most private of all search engines. The only one in fact that absolutely doesn't track you at all. Firefox is the most secure browser to use from a privacy standpoint and whatever browser you do use never use Chrome (by Google). In addition to that you can boost your privacy by adding the following add-ons (extensions) to your Firefox and/or Safari browser. And get yourself either an app or an add-on that deletes the persistent flash cookies (super cookies) from your system. I also recommend using an add-on that forces HTTPS connections wherever possible.

Disconnect

Disconnect blocks the otherwise invisible websites that track you.

https://disconnect.me/disconnect

Disconnect Search

When and if you want use Google (or other such) search engines this enables you to do it more privately.

https://disconnect.me/search

Adblock

And Adblock Plus for Firefox and AdBlock for Safari help you get rid of ads altogether.

 

[locust76]

.

 

[iWe]

I forgot to mention Disconnect Mobile iOS app that blocks tracking and malware threats in apps and browses (3G, 4G, LTE, or Wi-Fi). A malvertising filter is available as an optional add-on which blocks ads both in apps and browsers.

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/disconnect-mobile-privacy/id880693493

 

[Dave.UK]

Would love to see Google come up with this

Like they have had for a long time you mean?

http://www.google.co.uk/policies/privacy/

 

[cmaier]

Like they have had for a long time you mean?

http://www.google.co.uk/policies/privacy/

Unless I am missing something this just says what they do with your data but doesn't go into details of how they safeguard it. The apple site and the associated whitr paper pdf go into great details for every service telling us who generates keys, where they are stored, who has access to them and under what circumstances, etc. These two documents are not the same thing. And I believe google, unlike apple, actually can decrypt your data.

 

[Dave.UK]

Unless I am missing something this just says what they do with your data but doesn't go into details of how they safeguard it. The apple site and the associated whitr paper pdf go into great details for every service telling us who generates keys, where they are stored, who has access to them and under what circumstances, etc. These two documents are not the same thing. And I believe google, unlike apple, actually can decrypt your data.

All the information regarding how they safeguard your information is included in that link.

 

[MentalFloss]

Adblock

And Adblock Plus for Firefox and AdBlock for Safari help you get rid of ads altogether.

I always get a good facepalm out of it when someone suggests on an ad-financed web site that people should install Adblock.

 

[pwhitehead]

What do you take pictures of?

Regardless of what my pictures are, it shouldn't be exposed to cloud storage on apples servers.

 

[samcraig]

All the information regarding how they safeguard your information is included in that link.

No point in the discussion as they keep going back and forth between the argument of what a company is or is not doing versus making that info available on a Web page. The original comment stated that other companies didn't have such pages. When pointed out they did, they changed the argument.

 

[cocky jeremy]

I'm skeptical on that. Same with iCloud. I'm sure Apple can view anyones iCloud content anytime they want to. It's why I don't use iCloud or any other "cloud" service.

So, you don't use email at all? Chat apps at all?

 

[stylinexpat]

If they cared about our privacy then the Facebook application should only be listed as an application for available download from their application store only as we all know that they some how manage to get your data or other info from your smartphone.

 

[jonnysods]

This is a good move, there are a lot of questions flying around about their privacy skills and what happens to data right now!

 

[neversink]

I miss the good ole days when Steve didn't talk about it. He did it.

So you know exactly what Jobs was thinking and did behind closed doors.

 

[X-X]

"Our business model is very straightforward: We sell great products.
We don’t build a profile based on your email content or web browsing habits to sell to advertisers.
We don’t “monetize” the information you store on your iPhone or in iCloud. And we don’t read your email or your messages to get information to market to you.
[...]
One very small part of our business does serve advertisers, and that’s iAd."


That is hilarious hahaha

 

[rdlink]

How do they define "multiple, identical, consecutive characters?"

11 is not okay?

neither is

tt?

or do they mean 11 can't appear twice? as in XX11XXX11

More than two.

----------

Regardless of what my pictures are, it shouldn't be exposed to cloud storage on apples servers.

So, whether your pictures are in the cloud is your personal choice. There are those of us who are confident that we have taken the necessary steps to safeguard our information enough to be able to do it.

It's not a matter of whether it "should" or "shouldn't" be on their servers. It's a matter of personal preference. Period.

 

[Mr Fusion]

You have an account on a website that posts rumors and leaks about things that Apple would like to keep a secret on a daily basis.

But you can still believe that Apple can lie about this without any of their 98,000 employees leaking documents to the press that prove that it is a lie?

There's hundreds of thousands of minions toiling away in factories that have access to Apple's product pipeline. Government & LEO requests would be dealt and handled by a much, much smaller percentage of people in higher-ranking positions. So yeah... I can believe it.

Federal oversight of governmental agencies? You can't be serious. What we need is a few tech companies willing to push back. Like it or not, that's the mission here.

Faith placed in corporations is more misguided than faith placed in our government. One answers to shareholders and governments... The other answers to the people. (At least that's how it's supposed to work. Not saying it does. And if it doesn't it's our own **** fault.)

 

[cmaier]

All the information regarding how they safeguard your information is included in that link.

Then they don't do much. All I found is language that boils down to "your privacy is important. We safeguard it. "

 

[mrxak]

Good for them, and good for them adding DuckDuckGo to Safari's default search. I switched to it immediately and will not be looking back.

 

[kdarling]

Either you're being obtuse on purpose or have missed my point. The fact that a user can control how much they are targeted or not does not negate the fact that Apple does, indeed, collect enough information about you in order for iAds to be able to be targeted.Just like any other ad delivery service.

Given iAds popularity however, I wouldn't (as a consumer) be too worried

This. Apple really wanted iAds to take off. Remember when they were charging a minimum $1 million buy in, because they felt that selling ads to Apple users was worth so much more money?

However, Apple's target audience failed to buy like they were supposed to, so iAds has continuously dropped in price and popularity among advertisers.

Not to mention that Apple only took the money and never gave the users anything in return, unlike Google with all its free services.

Small jab at Google in there mentioning how they don't use your info to target ads at you.

Typical Apple handwaving. You'll notice Apple only named certain information vectors, and carefully avoided listing the things they DO collect and sell, such as our credit, demographics, locations, buying preferences from iTunes, etc:

No, the one mentioned in the article.

Specifically the one telling you how to limit iAd and what it can do to you:

Don't expect a page like that from the other companies anytime soon.

As pointed out here many times before, each person's Google Dashboard has had much more info than Apple will ever tell us about what they collect, and very similar control abilities to turn it off.

TL;DR - Whenever Apple makes an announcement, look carefully not at what they did say, but at what they didn't say. The former is always used to mask the latter.

 

[mrxak]

Do we believe this story 100%

So any terrorist around the world should be using Apple products, as Apple have now stated they are 100% secure and impossible to be spied on?

That's the story, yes?

Making sure that criminals, and yes, terrorists, can be secure in their private information is how we can be sure the rest of us can, too. I am far more concerned about government oppression around the world than I am the minuscule threat of dying to some terrorist attack.

That said, we need to be ever vigilant against governments of the world abusing their citizens. It's a constant arms race between privacy and those who would seek to violate it. The hope is that we can have enough technical barriers in place that the government only has the resources to spy on those that truly need to be spied on. The government isn't going to waste their time and money intercepting your iPhone order and switching out a chip inside for you or me, but if they are able to simply suck down all data traffic cheaply and easily from everyone, they will.

 

[cmaier]

Did you take a look at the white paper? Tons of details in there. Much more than the website.

This. Apple really wanted iAds to take off. Remember when they were charging a minimum $1 million buy in, because they felt that selling ads to Apple users was worth so much more money?

However, Apple's target audience failed to buy like they were supposed to, so iAds has continuously dropped in price and popularity among advertisers.

Not to mention that Apple only took the money and never gave the users anything in return, unlike Google with all its free services.



Typical Apple handwaving. You'll notice Apple only named certain information vectors, and carefully avoided listing the things they DO collect and sell, such as our credit, demographics, locations, buying preferences from iTunes, etc:

View attachment 493027

View attachment 493028



As pointed out here many times before, each person's Google Dashboard has had much more info than Apple will ever tell us about what they collect, and very similar control abilities to turn it off.

TL;DR - Whenever Apple makes an announcement, look carefully not at what they did say, but at what they didn't say. The former is always used to mask the latter.

 

[dugbug]

Nice page. I'm surprised it took this long. Given their pages about environment and supplier responsibility...

----------



Well kind of stupid in my opinion to call it out. While their business model might not be about using info to target ads, how do they explain iAds and how they work?

Truth is - iAds hasn't been a success and they would have really liked to have a revenue stream (not business model) like Google and other ad delivery platforms have. But they don't.

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/3...e-than-advertising-dollars-via-iad-really.htm

 

[GeneralChang]

This is part of the reason I like Apple so much. Google may not be malicious, but they sure are creepy a lot of the time. Apple can be kinda stuck up, but it’s really easy to see where they stand.

 

[John.B]

Adblock

And Adblock Plus for Firefox and AdBlock for Safari help you get rid of ads altogether.

+1!

There are also good privacy (anti-tracking) filters that plug right into Adblock Plus.

What I want is a browser that automatically opens in Private Mode, except for a select list of white-listed websites of my choosing.

I always get a good facepalm out of it when someone suggests on an ad-financed web site that people should install Adblock.

I get what you're saying, but the reality is that ad-supported websites wind up having almost no control over the ad domains they use, nor the resulting tracking cookies and any potential malware. I'd like to feel bad for them, but my security trumps their crappy business model. I'll white-list a website on a case-by-case basis, but I won't allow doubleclick and their ilk under any circumstances.