Back to my mac was nixed vecause it didn't work very well, not due to traffic.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iOS 14.5 Beta Directs 'Safe Browsing' Traffic in Safari Through Apple Server Instead of Google to Protect Personal User Data
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Tim Apple: the man-in-the-middle proxy that wants it all.
Next logical step is Apple VPN+, for only 5.99$ a month.
Next logical step is Apple VPN+, for only 5.99$ a month.
Again Apple is playing hypocrisy. In China, they are not doing this. They are routing through Tencent which Chinese govt has full access.
Really do wonder if they’re looking into this. Part of me is like, there’s no way they’re not—but also, who knows how many would trust a VPN by one of the most valuable companies (on-and-off, the most valuable company) on the planet?
Lord. I was gonna say, “for an easy example, think about if Facebook made a VPN…”
…then I remembered Onavo, which people ate up before it was exposed for what it was. So, if a company with that little public trust and that much clear documentation of user privacy violation can do it successfully (big quote marks re: Onavo’s “success”), Apple can probably do it too.
Ala Start Page, but even though I've used DDG (with SP as a backup), I still appreciate Apples move. Why these things aren't immediately available on MacOS isn't clear.
Agreed that it is pretty meaningless from protection from the monopolistic, controlling governmental standpoint which is the biggest threat to everyone worldwide. Too bad that even this isn't worldwide.
The good part is that they are helping to stop private companies from more tracking.
I don't even know what that's supposed to mean, but no, if Apple uses the Update API, Google has no idea what requests you make in the future, the past, or the present. Google simply sends Apple a phonebook of all known unsafe URLs. Apple then sends that to you. Neither Apple nor Google know whether you use any of it.
Ive been using DuckDuckGo for that last several years as my default search engine. It’s only gotten better and better.
Last edited:
I've tried several times and use it as a default for FireFox, but I rely on searches for my work and DDG is still behind.
Besides DDG is just a proxy for other search engines. All of which seem bent on censoring free speech. We still need a better search provider that is not anti free speech.
“Dependency“ is the word that explains what that was supposed to mean.
Still it works different - and that’s why Apple implemented proxy in iOS 14.5.
Previously, Google knew that you wanted to know which sites it considers unsafe (but not which sites you're asking about). Now, it doesn't know that; instead, Apple does.
I trust Apple a helluva lot more than Google. One company makes money from selling a physical product, the other makes their money from selling your information to others.
Oh good, now Google can't see any of my data... [he writes naïvely from his Google Fiber connection...]
There is the issue. Sadly you have received thumbs down for no reason as well. It is a very good question to be asking.
You cannot say "buh much privacy" Why? "Um um, BECAUSE APPLE." That isn't any sort of logical answer. Just because Apple takes a stance on some issues that seem sort of ok doesn't make that an automatic assumption.
Look at Siri, they were having people listening to the recordings. Some privacy huh? Imagine if that story never was exposed what else they would have tried to get away with....
Assuming privacy due to a "because Apple" argument is a really bad assumption to be making without even looking further.
Trust Apple more than Google, sure. That doesn't mean blindly either.
Last edited:
I‘d never use Facebooks VPN as its same to Googles - not trustworthy.
Yes, we need native VPN to make our devices even more secure. I for one could even imagine same static IP so all Apple devices are untraceable. That eliminates security layer i.e. banks can’t lock unusual activity relying on IP address, but heaven for users privacy. I’m not sure if Apple is saint enough yet to make that jump against profiling for beloved users. However at least they are working on ODoH that is kind of signal they are looking into networking.
Coming back to proxy Apple implements for Fraudulent Website Warning feature: I want Apple to be as much independent as possible, especially from third parties that rely on data mining.
This substituting ones service for themselves without giving users the option. Apple should instead compete and offer their own Search engine and services like everyone else does rather eschewing data out of other orgs services. That is what they are doing here.
Don’t like Facebook ... great ... offer their own version of Facebook.
I’m ok with some base privacy requirements when it comes to permissions and apps on the App store. But that is just it. Over riding other orgs services to the point that touch’s their business model is not good and looks fishy.
This is not just about privacy, its indeed Apple interference in other companies business models to their own gain.
Don’t like Facebook ... great ... offer their own version of Facebook.
I’m ok with some base privacy requirements when it comes to permissions and apps on the App store. But that is just it. Over riding other orgs services to the point that touch’s their business model is not good and looks fishy.
This is not just about privacy, its indeed Apple interference in other companies business models to their own gain.
Last edited: