Apple to Publish Privacy Labels for Preinstalled iOS Apps on Website

[JM]

The labels are too vague.
Usage data: Which usage data? Does it record my voice. what I type on the keyboard? What other apps I use?

Financial Info: which financial info? What i bought on iTunes store? My credit card? my debt to the bank? how much I am worth? my Paypal account?



Apple is better than Google and Amazon. Not private. They do collect data and have info on you just not as much as the Goolag and Facebook does. They actually record your voice and store it in their data base to teach Siri, so much for privacy.

Storing voice on private servers is different than storing voice on private servers and then selling that to advertisers.

Privacy can have various levels of what "private" means.

I think it is respecting privacy to store voice on servers that isn't sold to advertisers.

my problem with Google and Facebook is threat their ENTIRE business model depends on people freely giving them information about themselves so Google and Facebook can sell it.

Apple does not need user data to be successful. Their model is to make products people want to pay for with their money , not their personal data and information.

 

[I7guy]

The labels are too vague.
Usage data: Which usage data? Does it record my voice. what I type on the keyboard? What other apps I use?

Financial Info: which financial info? What i bought on iTunes store? My credit card? my debt to the bank? how much I am worth? my Paypal account?



Apple is better than Google and Amazon. Not private. They do collect data and have info on you just not as much as the Goolag and Facebook does. They actually record your voice and store it in their data base to teach Siri, so much for privacy.

There is nothing wrong with collecting data. Apple needs to collect data to enhance their experience of the ecosystem. Netflix collects data for it's "recommended for you", for example. Siriusxm collects data for the same purpose as well..is my guess. Not collecting some customer data would result in a horrible experience for many websites.

It's the selling/disbursing of the data for outside advertising purposes that I personally don't like.

 

[PPietra]

Well actually [pushes up glasses] you're wrong. This is what they said: "We think labels should be consistent across first and third party apps as well as reflect the strong measures apps may take to protect people's private information," a WhatsApp spokesperson told Axios. "While providing people with easy to read information is a good start, we believe it's important people can compare these 'privacy nutrition' labels from apps they download with apps that come pre-installed, like iMessage."

They accused Apple of not doing something: requiring it's apps to adhere to the same labels. Prior to today, none of Apple's messaging conveyed that their apps would be subject to the same disclosure. That clarification only came after FB's complaint. So yeah, valid.

the original news from Axios states:
"WhatsApp says that the provision is anti-competitive because Apple's own encrypted messaging service, Messages, is preinstalled on iPhones and doesn't need to be downloaded from Apple's app store, where the privacy labels are now required."
As such WhatsApp accused Apple of doing something before knowing the facts...

 

[PPietra]

Really? How many people do you know that don't use AdBlockers? Even my grandma has adblockers installed on her computer. If everyone relied on ads there would be no free services or apps anymore. Then all companies would start charging a monthly fee to use previously free services and then that would set off a whole different form of people crying.

confusing nonsense!!

 

[PPietra]

Apple transmits data is 100% fact. Look at what happened when Big Sur launched. Their servers went down and you could not open any third party apps on your computer because it transmits some form of data to Apple's servers. Also look at choices they have made in Big Sur. They exempted their own apps and made it so they can not be blocked by VPN or firewalls. Its already been proven by security experts that malware can easily be distributed in Big Sur because of those implications Apple has made.

seems you don’t understand that a security function is not transmission of private data. By your own example, apple’s apps not being affected by it demonstrates that it has nothing to do with following app use. You should read the opinions of other security experts before coming here and saying it is 100% fact...

 

[69Mustang]

the original news from Axios states:
"WhatsApp says that the provision is anti-competitive because Apple's own encrypted messaging service, Messages, is preinstalled on iPhones and doesn't need to be downloaded from Apple's app store, where the privacy labels are now required."
As such WhatsApp accused Apple of doing something before knowing the facts...

Wait... I quoted FB's words. You quoted Axios' rephrased summation and attributed that to FB as your evidence. Seems legit. FB's direct quote was in the two bullet points right below Axios' summation. Not sure how you missed that. Also how would they know Apple's intentions before lodging the complaint? As I stated, Apple only clarified their intentions with their own apps after FB's legit complaint was lodged.

 

[hans1972]

Then everyone would lose the free apps they so desperately love.

I want this to happen.

I would have noe problem losing a lot of the free services out there and that they charged for use instead of relying on ads or as many smaller companies do, sell data about you.

 

[gaximus]

We don't know to what extent Apple does with out data. They certainly don't come out and tell anyone exactly what they do with all the data they collect from iOS, iPadOS and macOS. Again not saying Apple is doing anything bad with the data but we have no idea.

Re-read my original comment. I’m not saying anything about Apple collecting data.

 

[gaximus]

Or apps that track you location within 3ft accurate 24/7. Apps that record every keystroke. Or read everything on your copy/paste board.
Nor do lots of people understand how extremely detailed this information is and that it goes far beyond the surveillance capabilities of most governments.
and anonymised data is a farce, most of the time, because of the detail and unique identifiers.

The things they can do with the data is pretty incredible. I Target a while back got sued because one of their customers had changed her buying and eating habits, and they were able to determine that she was pregnant and sent her some coupons for baby stuff. Her father got extremely upset and sued Target. She actually was pregnant and didn’t know yet, Target new before she did.

 

[9927036]

the original news from Axios states:
"WhatsApp says that the provision is anti-competitive because Apple's own encrypted messaging service, Messages, is preinstalled on iPhones and doesn't need to be downloaded from Apple's app store, where the privacy labels are now required."
As such WhatsApp accused Apple of doing something before knowing the facts...

No. Apple only said it would put privacy labels on their website after FB pointed out the anti-competitive behavior.

 

[9927036]

seems you don’t understand that a security function is not transmission of private data. By your own example, apple’s apps not being affected by it demonstrates that it has nothing to do with following app use. You should read the opinions of other security experts before coming here and saying it is 100% fact...

But Apple bypassing VPNs for their traffic is a huge security issue.

 

[Abazigal]

It’s amusing how these companies are not even bothering to try and defend their business model or refute any of the allegations against them any more. It’s like they have given up pretending to be a benefactor to smaller businesses and consumers any more.

 

[9927036]

I want this to happen.

I would have noe problem losing a lot of the free services out there and that they charged for use instead of relying on ads or as many smaller companies do, sell data about you.

It would also clean out all the poor quality apps in the App Store. Now that is a real problem.

 

[falainber]

Why can't everyone trust that Apple is a straightforward and honorable company?

I got a guy at work that lumps Apple in with Google, Amazon, and Facebook as shady data-collecting monsters. I had to laugh because he was so adamant about it: no changing his mind.

Because if you look at the disclosures for the products from all these companies they are basically identical. The only difference is Apple PR that throws around non-legal bounding feel-good assurances that mean nothing.

 

[9927036]

Why can't everyone trust that Apple is a straightforward and honorable company?

I got a guy at work that lumps Apple in with Google, Amazon, and Facebook as shady data-collecting monsters. I had to laugh because he was so adamant about it: no changing his mind.

Because Apple still has not implemented zero-knowledge encryption. If they were straightforward and honorable they could have done so in the last 10 years.

 

[iGüey]

Why can't everyone trust that Apple is a straightforward and honorable company?

Maybe because in the past they have on purpose slowed down older iPhones with the doubtful argument they intend to preserve old batteries.

or

More recently because they took away the chargers from the new iPhones boxes with the doubtful argument they intend to preserve the environment.

 

[H2SO4]

Even better than that.

I'm sure Apple absolutely knew that some poor, downtrodden company would trot that position out sooner or later.

They waited for the other company to complain, then they countered.

Let the other player make the opening gambit and then respond - with what you were always going to do anyways.

Smart.

If they knew in advance that someone would hit them with it and it was the right thing to do, why not do it before?

 

[alecgold]

Maybe because in the past they have on purpose slowed down older iPhones with the doubtful argument they intend to preserve old batteries.

or

More recently because they took away the chargers from the new iPhones boxes with the doubtful argument they intend to preserve the environment.

They had a legitimate reason to slow down phones, that is the verdict in several lawsuits. There where several phone batteries exploding in peoples pockets. But they should have told the owners of the phone explicitly what they did and why. But communication with its customers isn’t always the best part of apple.

They told you what they did and why with the charger. Where is your proof that it is just an economical decision?
And they have a track record in best practices/ industry firsts to prove you wrong.
How many wall chargers do you have laying around?

 

[Rainshadow]

Oh I understand perfectly what this is about. If you look at the "privacy labels" you will see Apple collects data on you and transmits it also. Facebook and Google will now have to use the same privacy labels. See Apple collects data on its users just like everyone else does. Here's the big difference. I paid Apple thousands of dollars for all my Apple hardware they don't need to track me they already have enough of my money. I have paid Google absolutely zero, not one penny. The fact that they do some tracking to monetize me using their free services is 100% understandable.

Can you stop crying and put up a source where Apple sells your data? Not uses it. Idc if Apple uses it in house or uses it to better their own services - in house. I care when companies leverage it to make money from third parties.

the closest thing I know is Apple selling default search engine spot to google... but I can change that. And it’s technically still google from there.

 

[gnasher729]

Apple transmits data is 100% fact. Look at what happened when Big Sur launched. Their servers went down and you could not open any third party apps on your computer because it transmits some form of data to Apple's servers. Also look at choices they have made in Big Sur. They exempted their own apps and made it so they can not be blocked by VPN or firewalls. Its already been proven by security experts that malware can easily be distributed in Big Sur because of those implications Apple has made.

I had to fill out the information for my app just yesterday and checked the terms carefully. If my app did this phoning home in order to check that you are not doing something that might hurt you, and don’t save that information longer than needed, that is 100% legit without informing the user.

And it is common knowledge that calling home in order to check whether digital signatures or encryption keys have not been revoked should be done without encryption because encryption keys might be revoked, and should be sent on the most direct way.

 

[mariusfanu]

Shut your mouths, WhatsApp / Facebook !

You forgot Instagram 😅

 

[PPietra]

Wait... I quoted FB's words. You quoted Axios' rephrased summation and attributed that to FB as your evidence. Seems legit. FB's direct quote was in the two bullet points right below Axios' summation. Not sure how you missed that. Also how would they know Apple's intentions before lodging the complaint? As I stated, Apple only clarified their intentions with their own apps after FB's legit complaint was lodged.

I quoted the journalist that wrote that quote from his conversation with WhatsApp. That journalist is the source of the information that you use and as such what he states has equal value. Not all that is written in a news has to be paraphrased with an actual quote.

 

[PPietra]

But Apple bypassing VPNs for their traffic is a huge security issue.

No idea how that is a security issue or bypassing. A VPN doesn’t do anything about any outward requests from a computer. If your computer asks for a connection to a public server it will make that connection wether you use a VPN or not. Most of what that researcher accused Apple of doing is just BS, many other specialists have said as much.

 

[JM]

Maybe because in the past they have on purpose slowed down older iPhones with the doubtful argument they intend to preserve old batteries.

or

More recently because they took away the chargers from the new iPhones boxes with the doubtful argument they intend to preserve the environment.

And?

what does that have to do with mishandling of user data and privacy?

your arguing a separate issue (which I agree those two examples were not handled well by Apple)

 

[69Mustang]

I quoted the journalist that wrote that quote from his conversation with WhatsApp. That journalist is the source of the information that you use and as such what he states has equal value. Not all that is written in a news has to be paraphrased with an actual quote.

That's silly and it's pretty obvious by your last sentence, you're not entirely sure what paraphrasing means. Paraphrasing does not have equal value with a direct quote from a source. This is getting pointless. Apple saw the validity in FB's complaint and issued a clarification regarding their own apps. You relying on Axios' interpretation instead of the direct quote is disingenuous but it serves your purpose I guess.