Is Apple Concerned About Your Privacy?

[MacTiki]

Now now now then: Remember that it's de rigueur these days to only blame Apple for a perceived problem, even if they're only one of many with a product being complained about.

I tend to believe those who have been victimized by Airtag stalkings would consider it to be an actual problem.

@MacTiki given your failure to consider that Apple are just one of many such devices, your entire post here is a cheap shot to blame Apple for something that has been around for a long time.

Airtag = Apple = MacRumors No cheap shot just staying focused on the product.

I could buy a tracker off Amazon today that would work anywhere where there's a cell signal and totally agnostic to providers.

How is this Apple's fault? And don't give me the "more iPhones that can track" nonsense either given what can be done with off the shelf trackers.

Once again I am focused on the Airtag.

But nevertheless at the risk of seeming to go off topic I will entertain your question for a brief moment.

Tile and other companies with similar products lack the marketing capabilities and style of Apple nor do these other companies portray themselves in the same light as Apple does.

From a marketing perspective Apple has built its business on the philosophy of rebellion and disruption while portraying themselves and their technology as liberator of the ordinary and the oppressed. In their eyes they can do no wrong with regards to what is good for humanity, the planet and the common good.

Apple’s philosophy of rebellion and disruption started in the early days of the personal computer era and has been carried on thru with the iPod, the iPhone, Mac OS, etc. One can see it even in the choices Apple has made regarding I/O ports and cable options.

For Apple and its shareholders this business philosophy has paid off in spades.

At this point Apple has gained more than a cult following. It has mastered the art of persuasion and wields that power like a fairy dusted broadsword.

From a business and financial perspective this is an admirable position to obtain.

But at what point does Apple’s ability to create and market technology which extends beyond Apples Ecosystem need to be called into question and put in check.

The Airtag is such a product which extends beyond Apple’s Ecosystem and can facilitate the erosion of ones liberties and safety.

If given the latitude I will assume that Apple had already consider the risks of the Airtag on the population at large prior to its launch. Most likely members from their risk assessment and legal departments calculated the cost to fight or settle any legal proceedings arising from the nefarious use of the Airtag.

That unfortunately is at the heart of the problem. People are not a commodity yet businesses treat them as such. To them a person is an asset or a liability. Apple has achieved great success in locking people into its ecosystem and generating a continuous stream of revenue from each of its users. <—- that is not a bad thing but good business.

However once a company places a dollar value on a person then that person individual worth and uniqueness becomes devalued. Insurance companies base their business on this and if you have been involved in a personal injury case you know that to them a person value boils down to just a number on a chart.

 

[TiggrToo]

The Airtag is such a product which extends beyond Apple’s Ecosystem and can facilitate the erosion of ones liberties and safety.

So can an iPhone. A friend of mine called me once after she’d left her phone in our car (yes, using her friends phone) and asked if I was at work because she’d tracked her phone to the office.

YOU want to focus on how this MUST be bad because folk can use it for bad things.

Anything can be used for bad purposes. You decided to create a whole thread about it though - and now it’s not going your way you seem to be back peddling about it.

 

[MacTiki]

So can an iPhone. A friend of mine called me once after she’d left her phone in our car (yes, using her friends phone) and asked if I was at work because she’d tracked her phone to the office.

YOU want to focus on how this MUST be bad because folk can use it for bad things.

Anything can be used for bad purposes. You decided to create a whole thread about it though - and now it’s not going your way you seem to be back peddling about it.

Where have I back pedaled? How is it not going may way? What way do I want it to go?

The Airtag is a device created for the soul purpose of tracking. It was designed without any means to prevent unsuspecting people from being tracked. And having a speaker that can be disabled is not a means to prevent tracking.

The iPhone and the Airtag is not the same.

An iPhone is a phone and personal computing / multimedia device. It was created for that purpose and has evolved over time to include features that can be used to track its location. If not properly safeguarded that feature can be exploited.

Your friend used the Find My feature or other app to locate her lost phone. From what you have said it does not appear she was trying to track you.

If you consider what she did a bad thing then maybe she is the kind of person that should have never been in your car in the first place.

 

[MacTiki]

So you believe then that tile, Samsung, and others should also be liable and should remove their products?

Are their products as easily used for nefarious purposes without the method of preventing the tracking of unsuspecting victims?

Your bias is horrendously clear.

If you mean that I am bias towards the personal safety of others over Apples profits then you would be correct.

If on the other hand you are asserting that I prefer another companies tracking device over Apples Airtags then you would be mistaken.

 

[Solomani]

I’ve read stories and heard reports of Airtags being used for nefarious purposes. i.e. the unauthorized tracking of people and property resulting in theft, harassment and bodily harm.

If these stories are true then it appears that Apple has created a product which places people in the real world in harms way.

This is ironic considering Apple claims to go to great lengths to secure its customers online privacy and prohibit companies from tracking its customers.

Will Apple be sued, over the use of an Airtag during the commission of a crime, by a victim?

Do laws need to be passed to prevent the use of this technology in its current form?

How can I and others opt-out of being tracked by an Airtag because we never agreed to any TOS or EUL.

Faulty logic.

The issue of Apple being genuinely concerned (or not) about our privacy is an intentional decision, an intentional "corporate strategy". Only God (Yahweh, Jesus, Buddha, Vishnu, whatever) really knows if the Apple management truly has genuine intentions to safeguard (or not) our privacy. I'm not a mind reader, and neither are you.

Which does NOT corroborate with your second point: Airtags being exploited. Guess what? There is zero chance that Apple intended for the Airtags to be "exploited for nefarious purposes", since exploits results in harm to their customer base as well as harm to the product's reputation and sales. It was never their intention for that to happen. Such exploits happen because there is no such thing as a perfectly coded software. Hence, it's likely an oversight. Or a security coding error. A security flaw. And such things are never intended nor desired by any trillion-dollar megacorporation.

It's in Apple's best interest to identify and fix and patch such flaws/exploits ASAP, and continue to strengthen and address the security flaws of such products. I have no doubt they will do so.

 

[MacTiki]

Faulty logic.

The issue of Apple being genuinely concerned (or not) about our privacy is an intentional decision, an intentional "corporate strategy". Only God (Yahweh, Jesus, Buddha, Vishnu, whatever) really knows if the Apple management truly has genuine intentions to safeguard (or not) our privacy. I'm not a mind reader, and neither are you.

Which does NOT corroborate with your second point: Airtags being expolited. Guess what? There is zero chance that Apple intended for the Airtags to be "exploited for nefarious purposes", since exploits results in harm to their customer base as well as harm to the product's reputation and sales. It was never their intention for that to happen. Such exploits happen because there is no such thing as a perfectly coded software. Hence, it's likely an oversight. Or a security coding error. A security flaw. And such things are never intended nor desired by any trillion-dollar megacorporation.

It's in Apple's best interest to identify and fix and patch such flaws/exploits ASAP, and continue to strengthen the security of such products. And of course, they are working to do so.

Not to sound petty or to inflame you or others but no where in my post did I say anything that you are stating I said.

Added the following below in the edit.

The point of my original post, that I must have failed to clearly articulate, is that Apple has created a product (Airtags) that exposes people in the real world to being tracked unknowingly and being victimized by nefarious people with no means to prevent that from happening.

As stated previously not everyone is an iPhone user or even a smartphone user, those low tech no tech people would have no way of knowing they are being tracked until it is too late. This is not a “oh my Airtag or Apple account was hacked” issue.

If Apple failed to see stalking as a possible outcome then that should speak volumes about a product not adequately being thought out. But then that would imply that Apple’s think tank of engineers, design members and department heads are cluelessly running around in circles at their corporate office. Which they could literally do.

This is not a conspiracy theory just a little common sense.

 

[MacTiki]

Last edited: 14 minutes ago

Ah. The all forgiving edit. It makes it easy to “hack” ones reply post post. ?

 

[Solomani]

Ah. The all forgiving edit. It makes it easy to “hack” ones reply post post. ?

I do edit my posts from time to time. Because choosing more precise words is good practice. And sometimes provides a bit more clarity, at least from my point of view. That doesn't mean you (or anyone) will ever agree with my point of view. That's fine with me.

 

[MacTiki]

I do edit my posts from time to time. Because choosing more precise words is good practice. And sometimes provides a bit more clarity, at least from my point of view. That doesn't mean you (or anyone) will ever agree with my point of view. That's fine with me.

I was trying to make a joke. ?. You had used the word “hack” in your original post and then you did your edit and “hack”ed it out. Get it.
I hope you have a great afternoon.

 

[Lihp8270]

Are their products as easily used for nefarious purposes without the method of preventing the tracking of unsuspecting victims?


If you mean that I am bias towards the personal safety of others over Apples profits then you would be correct.

If on the other hand you are asserting that I prefer another companies tracking device over Apples Airtags then you would be mistaken.

Yes their products are easier. They offer no notification at all if you’re being tracked for any mobile OS.

They also do not attempt to alert the user either.

Apple is literally doing more for privacy and anti-stalking with this product that any other competitor.

 

[MacTiki]

Yes their products are easier. They offer no notification at all if you’re being tracked for any mobile OS.

They also do not attempt to alert the user either.

Apple is literally doing more for privacy and anti-stalking with this product that any other competitor.

From your response it shows that I clearly have not mastered the art of communication and have failed to communicate my thoughts.

 

[BugeyeSTI]

From your response it shows that I clearly have not mastered the art of communication and have failed to communicate my thoughts.

It appears the other forum members in this thread do understand what you are communicating, they just don't agree with you. You can either accept that fact or you can choose not to...

 

[TiggrToo]

From your response it shows that I clearly have not mastered the art of communication and have failed to communicate my thoughts.

We understand you perfectly. We just totally disagree with you is all.

 

[44267547]

I’ve read stories and heard reports of Airtags being used for nefarious purposes. i.e. the unauthorized tracking of people and property resulting in theft, harassment and bodily harm.

If these stories are true then it appears that Apple has created a product which places people in the real world in harms way.

This is ironic considering Apple claims to go to great lengths to secure its customers online privacy and prohibit companies from tracking its customers.

Will Apple be sued, over the use of an Airtag during the commission of a crime, by a victim?

Do laws need to be passed to prevent the use of this technology in its current form?

How can I and others opt-out of being tracked by an Airtag because we never agreed to any TOS or EUL.

There’s definitely ‘workarounds’ with the AirTags for people inappropriately using them. However, it doesn’t mean this product necessarily needs to be discontinued or eliminated, but rather improved in terms of how they can strengthen the security as the product matures. Apple is a pretty intelligent company, and I’m sure there’s lots of things in the works where they’re already doing that right now, probably long before your thread even existed.

But to be perfectly honest, Apple falls in the category just like other tech companies do, where you can be tracked through multiple ways, but if you’re that insecure about your confidentiality/privacy of being tracked, then you probably shouldn’t even go out in public with the amount of cameras that are on you 24-7.

 

[MacTiki]

It appears the other forum members in this thread do understand what you are communicating, they just don't agree with you. You can either accept that fact or you can choose not to...

First I was referring to one member as I used “your” in my post.

Second that member continues, like others (now I am referencing other members), to refer to software to or audio beeps to alert users of being tracked.

We understand you perfectly. We just totally disagree with you is all.

See above.

Here is an example. The 70 something year old widow, without an iOS devices or other piece of tech, driving around in her $200,000 Bentley gets marked with an Airtag. She will have no idea that she is being stalked and about to be carjacked and left for dead in her driveway.

No member has stated how this can be prevented other than using an iOS devices or listening for a sound and continue to refer to the people I am calling victims as “users”.

 

[MacTiki]

There’s definitely ‘workarounds’ with the AirTags for people inappropriately using them. However, it doesn’t mean this product necessarily needs to be discontinued or eliminated, but rather improved in terms of how they can strengthen the security as the product matures. Apple is a pretty intelligent company, and I’m sure there’s lots of things in the works where they’re already doing that right now, probably long before your thread even existed.

But to be perfectly honest, Apple falls in the category just like other tech companies do, where you can be tracked through multiple ways, but if you’re that insecure about your confidentiality/privacy of being tracked, then you probably shouldn’t even go out in public with the amount of cameras that are on you 24-7.

Please don’t come at me like that. Correct my comments when found to be in error but don’t talk to me like you know me.

I’m voicing a legitimate concern over this product and how all too easily it endangers people’s property and safety.

“and I’m sure there’s lots of things in the works where they’re already doing that right now”

Maybe they should have had whatever these things you believe they are doing in place prior to the release of the Airtag.

Dead is dead and no software update is going to fix that.

 

[MacTiki]

The AirTag tracks itself.

What you are asking is equivalent of opting out of being run over by a Toyota Prius because you never agreed to any TOS or EUL with Toyota.

That “ How can I and others opt-out” was my attempt of asking a rhetorical question.

I’m not sure what you mean when you say “The Airtag tracks itself.” Are you referring to the audio alert it makes?

As far as you being run over by a Prius the driver of the Prius should be licensed and insured. You would need to seek a settlement from the drivers insurance, your own underinsured policy and possibly go after any of the drivers other assets.

You would think that being run over would be the worst of it but then you realize you need to hire a lawyer.

If the Prius is the Airtag and the driver is Apple then expect a long drawn out excruciatingly costly experience.

 

[TiggrToo]

First I was referring to one member as I used “your” in my post.

Second that member continues, like others (now I am referencing other members), to refer to software to or audio beeps to alert users of being tracked.


See above.

Here is an example. The 70 something year old widow, without an iOS devices or other piece of tech, driving around in her $200,000 Bentley gets marked with an Airtag. She will have no idea that she is being stalked and about to be carjacked and left for dead in her driveway.

No member has stated how this can be prevented other than using an iOS devices or listening for a sound and continue to refer to the people I am calling victims as “users”.

You can quote all the examples you want. Still doesn’t make a scrap bit of difference.

What about the old lady in her Bentley with a GPS tracking device shoved under the wheel well. Or a Tile, or ANY cell phone…

Why are you only focusing on Apple? This is NOT an Apple problem.

If someone drives their Ford F150 at the old lady and kills her, should we look at banning Ford F150s? Or all pickup trucks? How about cars in general? Better do bikes as well, because you never know.

You’re catastrophizing here - you’re looking for all the ways something can be used be bad purposes and thinking that’s enough to feel they should be banned.

It’s not. You’re never going to stop bad people taking useful things and doing bad things with them. You can ban airtags and they’ll have tiles. Ban tiles they’ve got GPS trackers, cellphones, smartwatches etc.

You’re badmouthing Apple and saying “and she doesn’t have any devices of tech” while ignoring that Apple at least added extra functionality in to enable detection. Both Apple and Android devices can detect AirTags now.

Can they detect tile trackers? Nope. Samsung trackers? Nope.

But here you are with your “APPLE AirTags are evil”.

And convincing almost no-one.

These statements are the same level of irrationality that the various governments are using to demand ’breakable’ encryption. Since encryption can be used to hide crimes, they feel they must have reversible encryption. This despite the fact the vast majority of encryption is used for genuine purposes.

Should we ban encryption as well as air tags because they can both be used in furtherance of a crime?

 

[TiggrToo]

First I was referring to one member as I used “your” in my post.

Second that member continues, like others (now I am referencing other members), to refer to software to or audio beeps to alert users of being tracked.


See above.

Here is an example. The 70 something year old widow, without an iOS devices or other piece of tech, driving around in her $200,000 Bentley gets marked with an Airtag. She will have no idea that she is being stalked and about to be carjacked and left for dead in her driveway.

No member has stated how this can be prevented other than using an iOS devices or listening for a sound and continue to refer to the people I am calling victims as “users”.

I’m a stalker. I really want to stalk this 70 something old lady and her $200,000 Bentley. I don’t want to risk that either she, or a passenger might have a smart phone so I whip out my trusty Tracking 2022 tracker (only $17 from Amazon with free overnight delivery) and she’s mine to stalk and carjack at my conveience.

Airtags - shmartags.

Who needs them silly Apple devices that will now alert smartphone users to their proximity, when I can set up a fake account with a stolen credit card and track her without fear of being captured?

How does banning Airtags solve this problem?

 

[deeddawg]

Here is an example. The 70 something year old widow, without an iOS devices or other piece of tech, driving around in her $200,000 Bentley gets marked with an Airtag cheap GPS tracker. She will have no idea that she is being stalked and about to be carjacked and left for dead in her driveway.

This potential scenario existed long before Apple AirTags existed, and it’d continue to exist even if Apple were to discontinue them.

Even T-Mobile and Verizon market cellular GPS trackers…. With ZERO notification to anyone if being used for nefarious purposes.

Tell us, what is your solution to the overall issue of it being easy to surreptitiously track people?

Also please answer this - what companies, other than Apple, have taken *any* real steps to try to balance notifying people of nefarious tracking with helping people find their lost stuff?

 

[TiggrToo]

This potential scenario existed long before Apple AirTags existed, and it’d continue to exist even if Apple were to discontinue them.

Even T-Mobile and Verizon market cellular GPS trackers…. With ZERO notification to anyone if being used for nefarious purposes.

Tell us, what is your solution?

Ban everything, everywhere?

 

[deeddawg]

Ban everything, everywhere?

Hey here’s an idea…

Bear with me…

It’s a crazy idea…

But maybe let’s make it illegal to stalk people?

I know, crazy, right?

But it’d completely eliminate stalking, right?

/s

 

[TiggrToo]

Hey here’s an idea…

Bear with me…

It’s a crazy idea…

But maybe let’s make it illegal to stalk people?

I know, crazy, right?

But it’d completely eliminate stalking, right?

/s

Brilliant!

 

[MacTiki]

You can quote all the examples you want. Still doesn’t make a scrap bit of difference.

What about the old lady in her Bentley with a GPS tracking device shoved under the wheel well. Or a Tile, or ANY cell phone…

Why are you only focusing on Apple? This is NOT an Apple problem.

My post / discussion is about the Airtag it is made by Apple and this is a website dedicated to Apple products.

You are correct this is not an Apple problem it is a problem for those who have been victimized from it use.

If someone drives their Ford F150 at the old lady and kills her, should we look at banning Ford F150s? Or all pickup trucks? How about cars in general? Better do bikes as well, because you never know.

The truck is not a tracking device.

You’re catastrophizing here - you’re looking for all the ways something can be used be bad purposes and thinking that’s enough to feel they should be banned.

Please tell that to those who have been victimized from its use.

It’s not. You’re never going to stop bad people taking useful things and doing bad things with them. You can ban airtags and they’ll have tiles. Ban tiles they’ve got GPS trackers, cellphones, smartwatches etc.

Once again I’m talking about Airtags and the risk people are subjected to who are outside the Apple Ecosystem.

You’re badmouthing Apple and saying “and she doesn’t have any devices of tech” while ignoring that Apple at least added extra functionality in to enable detection. Both Apple and Android devices can detect AirTags now.

Not once have I badmouthed Apple. If you feel that pointing out facts is badmouthing then one of us doesn’t grasp the meaning of badmouthing.

Can they detect tile trackers? Nope. Samsung trackers? Nope.

But here you are with your “APPLE AirTags are evil”.

Who are you quoting when you say “APPLE AirTags are evil”. It wasn’t me so please don’t confuse yourself or others.

And convincing almost no-one.

These statements are the same level of irrationality that the various governments are using to demand ’breakable’ encryption.

I had no idea that I was having a discussion with a licensed mental health professional. Thanks for the diagnosis.

Since encryption can be used to hide crimes, they feel they must have reversible encryption. This despite the fact the vast majority of encryption is used for genuine purposes.

Should we ban encryption as well as air tags because they can both be used in furtherance of a crime?

You bring up a good point.

It is illegal to threaten someone online with injury. This threat could be bodily or any other crime that would inflict harm. ie theft.

§ 875, which makes it a crime to transmit a threatening message over a communications device, including a computer. Under that law, anyone who transmits an "interstate communication" that contains a threat to injure another person can be imprisoned for up to five years if convicted.

It is likewise illegal to track someone without their permission in Virginia and likely other states.

§ 18.2-60.5. Unauthorized use of electronic tracking device; penalty.​

A. Any person who installs or places an electronic tracking device through intentionally deceptive means and without consent, or causes an electronic tracking device to be installed or placed through intentionally deceptive means and without consent, and uses such device to track the location of any person is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.

The fact that such unauthorized tracking is illegal Apple should have had safeguards built in to the Airtag product before it was released to prevent someone from breaking that law. And please remember the Airtag is a tracking device that is its sole purpose. It’s not a phone, a crowbar, a kitchen knife or a brick.

 

[MacTiki]

I’m a stalker. I really want to stalk this 70 something old lady and her $200,000 Bentley. I don’t want to risk that either she, or a passenger might have a smart phone so I whip out my trusty Tracking 2022 tracker (only $17 from Amazon with free overnight delivery) and she’s mine to stalk and carjack at my conveience.

Airtags - shmartags.

Who needs them silly Apple devices that will now alert smartphone users to their proximity, when I can set up a fake account with a stolen credit card and track her without fear of being captured?

How does banning Airtags solve this problem?

One again the topic is Airtags.