Apple Could Ban Apps That Don't Follow iOS 14 Anti-Tracking Rules, Says Software Chief Craig Federighi

[MacRumors]

Apple's software engineering chief Craig Federighi has warned developers to "play by the rules" as they relate to Apple's upcoming anti-tracking policy for iOS 14, or their apps could be removed from the App Store.

Starting early next year, iOS 14 will require apps to get opt-in permission from users to collect their random advertising identifier, which advertisers use to deliver personalized ads and track how effective their campaigns were. While it was originally supposed to arrive with iOS 14 earlier this year, Apple postponed the feature until early 2021 to give developers more time to accommodate it.

Major app developers and ad networks like Facebook have since spoken out against the feature, claiming that Apple's anti-tracking efforts are anticompetitive and will impact small businesses. Apple says that it is concerned about users being tracked without their consent and having their data bundled and resold by advertising networks. Tracking across apps and websites owned by multiple companies and data sold by data brokers can be "invasive and "creepy," according to Apple.

Although Apple has delayed introduction of the new policy, all apps will be expected to abide by Apple's App Tracking Transparency Rules once they come into effect. Speaking to The Telegraph, Federighi said:

"There will be policy enforcement. Any form or mechanism of tracking a user for advertising or for providing information to data brokers will have to ask for permissions. Failure to do so is a violation of App Store policy… and are grounds for having an app removed."

Federighi also emphasized that Apple expects advertisers to adapt to the change, and suggested that social media platforms had no choice but to conform to the new policy: "The largest players understand they have to play by the rules here," he told The Telegraph, adding that despite inevitable "spirited debate," he believed they would work to find a solution.

Article Link: Apple Could Ban Apps That Don't Follow iOS 14 Anti-Tracking Rules, Says Software Chief Craig Federighi

 

[Caliber26]

Being trapped inside a walled garden with Craig Federighi is what dreams are made of.

 

[iAFC]

This is one of the main reasons I'll never even consider switching to Android.

 

[GeoStructural]

This is one move I support. Go Apple!

 

[DinkThifferent]

New lawsuits by WeTotallyDoNotTrackAndSellYourInfo Inc. in 3...2...1....

 

[Apple Knowledge Navigator]

Craig Federighi stars as...

The Enforcer

Coming soon

 

[Macwatcher123]

Or read the entire transcript without a pay wall over here Essential: Apple’s Craig Federighi on privacy protection

 

[swingerofbirch]

Doesn't Google do this? I mean it seems like they must because if I get an email in one service they know to put reminders from it in another (I actually don't mind and find this convenient). And Apple takes a lot of money from them each year to be the default search engine.

I did Apple sales chat through a contractor for a while, and speaking of creepy, we could follow customers without them knowing (in fact we were not allowed to tell them) across all the pages on the Apple Store. So once you started chatting with someone like me (on the Apple Store when the chat thing pops up), I could see each page you had been on and I had a live view of the page you were currently on (well mostly live--sometimes it didn't catch up exactly right). I didn't see non-Apple pages you browsed to, but I did see everything you were viewing on apple.com's store. So if I sent you a link to a product, I could see if you followed that link or not, and I could see if you searched for something else. And then at the end I could see the sales number (started with a W I think). And we would post the number in our group chat to get the sale associated with us. This was probably around 2009 or so. It's probably changed. I remember toward the end of my tenure there we lost the ability to build carts for customers, which was one part of the job (sort of like a virtual personal shopper). We were graded on conversion rate (chats into sales), AppleCare add-ons, and other metrics I can't remember. But I remember them telling us: They wouldn't be on the site unless they wanted to buy, and they wouldn't be reaching out to you unless they just had a small obstacle they needed to get over to make that purchase. So it was not a support job at all, purely sales. We had some sort of weird tagline we used to make sure we stayed on after the purchase to get the order number. It was something like we were double checking to make sure the order went through. Like keep the chat open and I can double check your order went through and . . . (I forget the rest of it). But that's what let us see the sales order number. Sometimes the order automatically was associated with the chat, and sometimes not which is why we needed to get the number.

I would call it "creepy" and "invasive."

 

[and 1989 others]

Cannot wait for Zuckerberg and Dorsey to find out. I'll grab some snacks.

 

[GadgetBen]

Here's looking at you Facebook

 

[hybrid_x]

I fully support this. Google and Facebook can keep their hands off my data, thanks.

 

[PlainviewX]

Could?

 

[contacos]

The worst offender is by far Instagram in my opinion. It isn't even that much about having Ads, it is how particular precise those are. They are downright creepy. It feels like they are listening to you. Also by being so deeply detailed and "on point", you miss out of a lot of other stuff you may also like. All I am getting nowadays is ads for iPhone cases. I do not know how many times I already clicked "I ALREADY BOUGHT IT" in the last 3 weeks. Yesterday I was telling my BF something random like "I am really amazed that our butter in the fridge is still not expired" and lord and behold, half an hour later I get an ad for BUTTER on Instagram ...

 

[sharleyP]

Could?

Yep. If you are a small developer. If it’s a big company (let’s say Uber) then all they get is a slap on the wrist and they have to promise to never ever do that again🤞

 

[luvbug]

APPLE: That's WILL BE removed, right?

 

[Kabeyun]

Go Apple! Privacy is the issue of the day.

 

[Unsupported]

Go to just about any web site without using Safari's Private mode and then open Privacy in Safari Preferences - how many cookies can you see that include "google"?

 

[JosephAW]

Can’t wait until this comes to the desktop on the M1

 

[nwcs]

My only question is will they enforce the “ask app not to track” action? That is, if you ask the app not to track that it doesn’t actually track? I can imagine many apps will simply ignore the request to not track while the user will assume that it won’t track at all.

 

[macsrcool1234]

looking at you, facebook.

 

[The Cappy]

I’m sure there’s competition among pick-pockets too. Being anti-competitive toward them is no bad thing.

 

[The Cappy]

Being trapped inside a walled garden with Craig Federighi is what dreams are made of.

Did you perchance just make an argument that ad-tracking is akin to freedom?

 

[az431]

My only question is will they enforce the “ask app not to track” action? That is, if you ask the app not to track that it doesn’t actually track? I can imagine many apps will simply ignore the request to not track while the user will assume that it won’t track at all.

Did you read the article? The app must get permission to use your devices advertising ID. If it doesn’t get that permission then it is not given access to that ID. It’s not an honor system.

 

[pawkor]

Great idea!!

 

[BWhaler]

Thank you Apple.