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.
EU Mobile Operators Want Apple's iCloud Private Relay Service to Be Outlawed Over Concerns of 'Digital Sovereignty'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
oh dear, Apple's icloud private relay prevents others from snooping on users safari browser habits and now many of the EU's mobile phone operators are complaing it will interfere with their 'managing their networks'. To put it in lamen terms, it will stop them from snooping on their customers safari browser habits.
Something to keep in mind is Private Relay according to Apples own documentation has you exit onto the internet in the same region as you enter.
So if you enter a relay in Texas you are more than likely going to exit the relay also in Texas. They have documented that here: https://developer.apple.com/support/prepare-your-network-for-icloud-private-relay
Here is the relevant quote from that page:
"make it more difficult to block dangerous content."
More like make it more difficult to censor the free exchange of information in a world where the state increasingly lusts after more and more control.
More like make it more difficult to censor the free exchange of information in a world where the state increasingly lusts after more and more control.
You really think more than 50% of all iPhones are using a VPN?
I am not sure what country you are based in, but in the US about 25% of employees work for a company with fewer that 20 employees. They almost surely don’t have an IT department and aren’t using a VPN.
On top of that, only a small fraction of employees even get a “work phone” or are working from home…..
Unless you are living in Qatar or something, I bet the percent of iPhones using a VPN is down in the single digits.
It’s been pretty stable for me. Just that there’s this one website that I can’t access while private relay is active, but I have another browser (command) just for it.
Fantastic information, thanks for taking the time to post it.
After reading this article, I've turned the feature on. If mobile phone carriers and governments are against it, then it's almost certainly a boon for protecting my privacy. All the better that Apple can't see the info themselves.
Sick and tired of having our privacy treated like a publicly traded commodity.
Sick and tired of having our privacy treated like a publicly traded commodity.
I use it. The only downside I’ve found so far is that you can’t watch Hulu if you have it enabled. I’m hoping more websites don’t find a way around it. It seems to work with more sites than other VPNs I’ve tried.
The ISP isn’t paying, the CDN (Netflix, Google, etc) is paying to put the servers within the ISP’s network to improve their own customers’ experience. Perhaps there is some sort of arrangement that sees the ISP give customer’s data to said CDN in exchange for the servers being placed in the first place. No data, no devices, much more expensive network costs…
Thanks for the idea. I just made a 'Radio playlist' on Spotify and this is what it came up with:
What is this different opposed to a VPN?
You can easily install a VPN, why not this?
$$$, that's what this is about, nothing else.
You can easily install a VPN, why not this?
$$$, that's what this is about, nothing else.
So wild... it's like a lightweight VPN... why wouldn't their argument, if it goes through, also make all VPNs illegal, too...? I'd hate for this to set a precedent for EU where any form of VPN is then made illegal even though that's not explicitly what they're targeting now (it definitely seems like a strong foothold for doing so.)
Definitely makes sense this request is coming from companies likely tracking people and selling that info (which oddly flies in the face of EU's focus on privacy [they pushed for cookie warnings & things while carriers are still wanting to track everything as if privacy doesn't involve the server/network side of things just as much as browser cookies.])
Certainly this won't go through, right? Those companies asked, because they're greedy & apparently don't care about consumer benefits & protections, but it really would be hypocritical of the EU (and potentially set a dangerous precedent) if it actually goes through.
Definitely makes sense this request is coming from companies likely tracking people and selling that info (which oddly flies in the face of EU's focus on privacy [they pushed for cookie warnings & things while carriers are still wanting to track everything as if privacy doesn't involve the server/network side of things just as much as browser cookies.])
Certainly this won't go through, right? Those companies asked, because they're greedy & apparently don't care about consumer benefits & protections, but it really would be hypocritical of the EU (and potentially set a dangerous precedent) if it actually goes through.
Last edited:
When your business model is garbage, you’ll spin anything pro-consumer as a negative to protect it.
Discovered the hard way that private relay breaks the device restore process. Can’t authenticate to iCloud.
Forgotten this even existed, just turned it on now ?
This is literally a service that you have to pay for in order to enable. How can that possibly impinge on a user’s imagined “digital sovereignty”? If it’s off by default and you can just as easily turn it back off when you’re subscribed to icloud+ then you can’t argue that apple is taking away people’s rights to anything
Like Tor or any-other "hide my browsing habits" -options, it's great for the end-user's privacy.
But, it might also be misused. Sometimes governments like to ban certain "browsing habits" (like torrents, and what have you).
I am not sure in what way governments might be hostile to Apple's iCloud Private Relay Service.
But, it might also be misused. Sometimes governments like to ban certain "browsing habits" (like torrents, and what have you).
I am not sure in what way governments might be hostile to Apple's iCloud Private Relay Service.
I think this is a matter of the ISP being able to govern over their users without interference (rather than the user's ability to act without interference; this actually goes against that idea.) They want more (or to keep) tracking & control over the people who use their service rather than respecting their privacy via a very well established method that's existed years before now (a-la a VPN & also isn't free for everyone that you then need to opt-into already like you mentioned) & goes against the EU's push for digital privacy with their push for GDPR, etc. This seriously shouldn't go through & only revealed the greed of these companies.
No.. try and keep context, I asked the following:
I wonder why apple agreed to have it not available in countries like russia or china?
Also greed? Control? Political? Aid and abed local 'policies' and law ? Doesn't people need their privacy there?
Godwin’s Law strikes again!
If I may make an addendum to Godwin’s Law, the longer the Internet persists, the quicker Godwin’s Law comes into play in any conversation. (That is, the time to Godwin for any argument decreases the older the Internet gets.)