Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
That's a much better response than "don't confuse people".

If you can't be bothered to verify before you post why should someone take the time to correct you? You're the one posting the false information. The same real answer was posted numerous times in this thread before your worthless comment.
 
This is yet another reason why I am slowly, but surely migrating away from Apple after 38 years of being a customer and having bought tens of thousands in dollars worth of their hardware and software.
First, we had Apple kowtow to the Chinese due to the Hong Kong app that they pulled. Now we have Apple kowtowing to the FBI. How is this "thinking different"? What else will Apple do in the future? It's bad enough, on a different front, that it took them until late 2019 to pull their heads out and fix the despicable butterfly keyboard mechanism debacle.
Sadly, Apple is - to me anyway - no longer the vision that Steve Jobs had. I've stuck with Apple even during the "dark days" of the mid-90's. I "evangelized" their products to anyone and everyone with two ears.
No more. I'm through with Apple, their attitude toward the customer, and other debacles like macOS 10.15 Catalina which should never have seen the light of day when it did. Ditto iOS 13.
I'll still keep my current crop of Apple devices but my purchasing days of Apple products is over.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jimmy Bubbles
You’re being disingenuous again. Apple isn’t selling user data to Google because Google gets no user identifying information.

Your statement “Apple is handing its users to Google” is nothing more than a lie.

Apple makes Google the default browser on all iPhones. That is called handing its users to Google. Google then harvests those users' data based on the search requests they make from those phones. And Apple is rewarded $9B/year to do so. You think Google would pay $9B/year to Apple if they couldn't correlate search queries to actual users?
 
  • Like
Reactions: levander
If you can't be bothered to verify before you post why should someone take the time to correct you? You're the one posting the false information. The same real answer was posted numerous times in this thread before your worthless comment.
Being condescending is also equally as unhelpful as the other comment.
 
It's not "end-to-end" encrypted, which is a setup where only the user holds the keys.

iCloud data is encrypted: (a) during transport, and (b) at-rest, but using keys that Apple manages.

See the difference? Apple is taking steps to ensure that your data is secure, but this article is suggesting that they've ceased plans to implement the more complex end-to-end encryption mechanism.

Let's not spread misinformation.

with apple having the key, which means access. no thank you!
 
Given how Apple bang on about FBI wanted data being available in backups whenever one of these stories breaks, and that Apple will always say it is willing to work with authorities to help investigations, nobody should be surprised by this story. There is no way they could close off the loophole.

The only question is how long will it be legally possible for Apple to enable end-to-end encryption anywhere in the chain, and I have no doubt the countdown is well underway to new laws preventing it.

Is Apple doing anything wrong? No. They are doing the maximum to protect consumers privacy against a backdrop of significant government pressure.

I wonder why you never hear these stories about FBI wrestling with trying to retrieve data stored on Android devices or Googles cloud anymore? (HINT: it's not because the FBI sees Android as a lost cause)
 
This is why your own storage device at home or office should be the only place you back up all your devices. You can buy the best encrypted devices and only you have access to it. Backing up on an iCloud server and then arguing about who has access to someone else's server is stupid. Buy your own storage device and set your own up.

 
Disagree. It is all comparative. And within the current governmental/business regulations, Apple has done far better than others.
Another take is that Apple isn't finished with its plans to monetize user data. All corporations are amoral, to believe otherwise is naïve.
 
Undeniable proof that Apple's security messages are nothing but advertising
So much for those who Complain about China and Huawei. US Government wants same access to cloud servers and smartphones as China, Israel, Saudi,UAE and other rogue countries do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MultiMan
Apple makes Google the default browser on all iPhones. That is called handing its users to Google. Google then harvests those users' data based on the search requests they make from those phones. And Apple is rewarded $9B/year to do so. You think Google would pay $9B/year to Apple if they couldn't correlate search queries to actual users?
Apple makes Google the default search, not browser. As in, I type something into the Safari address bar and it performs a search Apple controls what data gets sent to Google. This is not the same as if I loaded google.com into a browser and did a search from there.

Google will absolutely pay $9 billion a year for data, even if it’s anonymized. iOS users are by far the most valuable mobile customers. Their data is worth more to Google and their advertisers because it represents a valuable portion of the market willing to spend money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MEJHarrison
This is yet another reason why I am slowly, but surely migrating away from Apple after 38 years of being a customer and having bought tens of thousands in dollars worth of their hardware and software.
First, we had Apple kowtow to the Chinese due to the Hong Kong app that they pulled. Now we have Apple kowtowing to the FBI. How is this "thinking different"? What else will Apple do in the future? It's bad enough, on a different front, that it took them until late 2019 to pull their heads out and fix the despicable butterfly keyboard mechanism debacle.
Sadly, Apple is - to me anyway - no longer the vision that Steve Jobs had. I've stuck with Apple even during the "dark days" of the mid-90's. I "evangelized" their products to anyone and everyone with two ears.
No more. I'm through with Apple, their attitude toward the customer, and other debacles like macOS 10.15 Catalina which should never have seen the light of day when it did. Ditto iOS 13.
I'll still keep my current crop of Apple devices but my purchasing days of Apple products is over.

Not sure of your point here- does anyone else have cloud servers where the government can't demand access to? No. So the solution with Apple is the same as any other solution: don't use any cloud except your own to back up (if it's a personal concern). I'm just not seeing where the "grass is greener" unless you're giving up on tech entirely.
 
  • Like
Reactions: krbrock1
Another take is that Apple isn't finished with its plans to monetize user data. All corporations are amoral, to believe otherwise is naïve.
Ah yes, make up something that you think Apple is going to do in the future so you can criticize them even when it hasn’t happened yet.

Apple makes a fortune selling hardware. They don’t need to sell out user data to advertisers like Google or Facebook does. And with government data regarding data collection very likely coming, the ability to make money harvesting data (for ads) is going to be even harder. Which means Google and Facebook will see reduced revenues while Apple will chug along as they do now because they didn’t build their business off peoples data.
 
Im really confused as to what is and is not encrypted. According to this iCloud is encrypted so how is anyone getting into these iCloud backups? Can someone please explain


This is primarily around the original comment by Apple that they were pursuing iCloud encryption that Apple cannot unlock and “gift” to any agency with a warrant or similar request.

For whatever reason, Apple has apparently dropped this.
The iCloud is encrypted however Apple is the holder of the encryption key(s).
 
Nothing new, and they have been clear about it. I always thought, this was kind of a compromise. "We'll not encrypt icloud backups and hand them over to the authorities if needed - maybe even routinely run analytics software on them - but we're being open about it so you can resort to encrypted itunes backups, if you have something to hide".

it's plainly documented in the online help and there has never been a technical reason for not encrypting icloud backups - so it was pretty obvious that it was purposefully done this way.
 
Apple makes Google the default search, not browser. As in, I type something into the Safari address bar and it performs a search Apple controls what data gets sent to Google. This is not the same as if I loaded google.com into a browser and did a search from there.

Google will absolutely pay $9 billion a year for data, even if it’s anonymized. iOS users are by far the most valuable mobile customers. Their data is worth more to Google and their advertisers because it represents a valuable portion of the market willing to spend money.

Agreed and that's all Google needs - your search queries. From that and your IP they can easily fingerprint who you are without any more data needed from Apple. Without user correlation the data wouldn't be worth $9B/year to Google because they wouldn't be able to charge the same ad rates for untargeted users.
 
I see a pattern of posters who will twist things around to make Apple look bad no matter what.

Apple is nothing like Google in how it gathers or treats your data. To imply they are is not just a logical fallacy (false equivalency) is is nothing short of an outright lie. Google is orders of magnitude worse than Apple in the quantity of data they collect, where they collect it from and what they use it for.

BTW, monetization and encryption are not the same thing. So why are you bringing monetization into this discussion?
Relevant to this specific story, only one of the two companies you mentioned allows users the choice to encrypt their device backups with a key that is possessed by the user, not the company.

It’s not Apple.
 
My mail isn’t encrypted at all?

Of course it's not end to end encrypted, unless you use PGP or S/MIME, in that case you need to provide your recipient with a public key so they can decrypt your email.

But if you were asking whether your connection with iCloud encrypted, then yes it uses https.
 
Agreed and that's all Google needs - your search queries. From that and your IP they can easily fingerprint who you are without any more data needed from Apple. Without user correlation the data wouldn't be worth $9B/year to Google because they wouldn't be able to charge the same ad rates for untargeted users.
You’re making too many assumptions to arrive at an incorrect conclusion.
 
iCloud is not secure, because it is not encrypted. therefore it's not an option for backups.
It IS encrypted, but some content are end to end encrypted some are just encrypted.
[automerge]1579640138[/automerge]
No, end-to-end encryption means only that data is encrypted while moving from one end to another and that no third-party can read the data while in transit. There are no requirements that the receiver of the data can not read the data.

HTTPS using TLS is an example of end-to-end encryption. The webserver (sender) can read the contents of the web pages and so can the browser (receiver). And yet it is end-to-end encrypted.
I think you are describing encryption, e2e encryption means data is encrypted in your device and you hold the keys, Apple can't see the content.
 
Last edited:
People have got to get it into their heads that Apple isn't on your side, and they're not your friend. They willfully give away all your private data - EVERYTHING - to every tom dick & Harry law enforcement court warrant.
Hardly trustworthy.
 



More than two years ago, Apple informed the FBI that it planned to roll out end-to-end encryption for iCloud backups, according to Reuters. Apple ultimately dropped the plan at some point after the FBI objected, although the report notes that it is unclear if the federal agency was a factor in the decision.

icloud-backup-800x420.jpg

A former Apple employee told Reuters that the company did not want to risk scrutiny from public officials for potentially protecting criminals, being sued for making previously accessible data out of reach of government agencies, or the move encouraging new legislation against encryption.

"They decided they weren't going to poke the bear anymore," the person said, after Apple's legal battle with the FBI in 2016 over unlocking an iPhone used by a shooter in the San Bernardino, California attack. In that case, the FBI ultimately found an alternative method of unlocking the iPhone.

Apple faces a similar standoff with the FBI over refusing to unlock two passcode-protected iPhones that investigators believe were owned by Mohammed Saeed Alshamrani, the suspect of a mass shooting at a Naval Air Station in Florida last month. Apple said it has provided the FBI with all data in its possession.

Apple has taken a hard line on refusing to create a backdoor into iOS that would allow the FBI to unlock password-protected iPhones to assist in their investigations, but it does provide data backed up to iCloud to authorities when lawfully requested, as outlined in its semiannual Transparency Reports.

Note: Due to the political nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Political News forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.

Article Link: Apple Reportedly Dropped Plans for End-to-End Encrypted iCloud Backups After FBI Objected
Instead of creating a back door, they’re just gonna leave their back door wide open to anyone that “legally and lawfully” protects it. Riiiiight...and the FBI hasn’t abused any of their powers in the past 3+ years?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.