Apple holds the decryption keys to all iCloud data. True encryption is only the user has the keys to decrypt their data. I store some data on Synology's C2 Cloud backup. My data is encrypted and only I have the 100-character password to decrypt my data. Synology couldn't decrypt the contents even if forced to by the government. That is true encryption. Apple can say whatever they want as to why they have the keys, but end result is they can decrypt your data for any reason at any time. Yes, there is some risk with true encryption. If you ever lose your decryption password or key there is no way to ever recover your data. So Apple is trying to spin it as we want to help out the consumer so they never lose access to their data so we will always hold the keys to their iCloud data in case they ever lose it. So I guess you have to reconcile whether you trust yourself or another company more with the keys to your encrypted data. I know who I would trust more.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Craig Federighi Shares Apple's Four Privacy Principles in Conference Keynote
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What he said and what Apple is doing are not the same.
I believe the facts:
I believe the facts:
- Apple is exempting their own connections from VPN frameworks. This is a security risk by itself
- Ask their Chinese users about privacy! They have NONE. And please, don't trot out the "we follow the laws of the countries" B.S. The truth is that Apple had to cave because their entire manufacturing and supply chain is in China. How dumb was that?
- Apple will share all of the data on iCloud and all of the connection data with the U.S. government. Oh, and look, that information is NOT encrypted (or Apple holds the encryption key).
"Federighi said that other companies "gather, sell, and hoard" as much personal data from customers as possible, which Apple finds "unacceptable."
But any privacy focused company would say the same about others. True, or slightly untrue.
You own it to yourself to do the work, unfortunately.
But any privacy focused company would say the same about others. True, or slightly untrue.
You own it to yourself to do the work, unfortunately.
So Federighi should come out and say exactly what Apple does with all the data it collects and for exactly how long their store, hold, or analyze that data. Sure it's easy to pick on Google-everyone knows what they do. But Apple should be more forthcoming about what they do with data and how long they store it. It's easy for Apple to say all this because they are primarily a hardware company that makes the lion share of all its revenue from hardware. The software it creates is just a way to lock users into the hardware ecosystem. Other companies don't have that luxury. They create software services, much of which users have come to expect for free. So there will always be a trade off. If you want free services like Gmail, Youtube, and Facebook then that "freeness" comes with a tradeoff. If a company is making a free service that costs nothing to the end user then of course it is going to try to monetize user data to make the most it can. Just like Apple loves to charge top, top dollar for all the stuff they make. As long as Google etc are functioning within the law, then it is up to the end user whether you consider it a fair trade for your data to use the free services. If not, then it's an easy solution, stop using the free services that harvest your data.
You’re right, folks. Apple’s leadership on the privacy issue didn’t pass the MacRumors Purity Test, so they must be just like everyone else. Such a pity. Might as well bail and go all in with Google and Facebook since they’re all the same.
Right, which is actually how iCloud Keychain works if you don't set a recovery PIN and you lose all your devices. That data is lost.
Passing the test and going all-in with other providers are not mutually exclusive. We can stick with Apple for some things but still demand greater transparency from them.
Ha you mean the same MacRumors purity test that everyone on here uses to demonize Google and Facebook. Apple could literally do the same thing and people would be bending over backwards making up every excuse in the book to justify and explain why Apple does it. I don't use Facebook and don't particularly care for Google but when I use their free services I completely understand the trade off so I don't get self righteous about my privacy.
I watched the bit with Federighi and was estranged by his statement that Apple has always been about privacy, because they once built computers where your data was always physically by your side. Wan't that the time before the internet? Before privacy and security were so at risk?
I object to false equivalencies and whataboutism, which are used here to suggest that Apple has the same approach to your personal data as Facebook.
I really have no intention of causing any offence, it might be fair to say Apple are least creepy company wrt to Google, Facebook and the rest, but the idea that they are protecting your privacy is at best extremely trusting on your part.
For what's worth I think society will look back on this era, in the same way we look back on asbestos and tobacco, in the future they will either have no concept of privacy because we all stood her and let the big companies take it away, or people will look at the damage data harvesting / social media and the like did in terms of mental health problems, suicide rates, hate based killings and wonder what the hell we were smoking.
I think Europe is beginining to see the large US corporations data handling as a major concern and is likely to act, the chances are that will provoke a reaction from the US and Russia and China will use FD, Twitter etc to fan that fire.
At the moment Google Android, Facebook, Amazon and Microsoft all make you hand over all your data yo use there products, this is the very moment Apple should say "We take nothing you don't specifically want to hand over" and I'd upgrade without concern, but Apple's current stance is "We take a bit less that the other guys ".
I have made statements based on personal research or cited sources. If you disagree, you're welcome to submit your own verifiable claims.
And:
I did no such thing, I'm arguing for greater transparency on Apple's part.
Heh, you jumped into an exchange and then misunderstood. S’ok. To clarify, I wasn’t referring to you when I said I object to false equivalencies and whataboutism, logical fallacies used in forums to suggest that Apple is the same as Facebook. For the record, I have no problem with holding corporations accountable.
NO.
He's a liar.
WHEN Did Apple publicly mention 'privacy' was part of their goals in the 90's like Craig states in this video?! I'll wait.
If you really think Apple cares about privacy and security then read this article. They left loopholes in Big Sur so that their apps and processes can get around firewalls and VPNs. You have to ask yourself why would Apple leave holes in their OS so their apps can get around firewalls if they care so much about privacy.
Privacy and security are not not binary. And it's difficult to move the needle on everything at once. Not to mention the link has nothing to do with the overall handling of PII on Apple Inc.This translates to Apple saying we care about your privacy as much as we don't want other companies to track you, but we will make sure our apps can send all the data we want back to us. Since we made the devices it's ok for us to track you, just not anybody else.
Macworld
Macworld is your ultimate guide to Apple's product universe, explaining what's new, what's best and how to make the most out of the products you love.www.macworld.co.uk
Last edited: