Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Our Approach to Privacy

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 183 posts

Re: Our Approach to Privacy

#91

Post by greggman »

guyfawkes303 wrote: post #77
greggman wrote: post #74

I'm happy Apple is at least trying hard to deal with privacy but honestly I don't think they are doing enough, at least for me. For example, I don't really want to give most apps constant access to my photos, my camera, or my mic but I really don't have a whole lot of choice if I still want to use popular apps and services like Facebook, Instagram, Messenger, Hangouts, Line, WhatsApp etc.. I really wish that every ti…

I think you mis-understand how iOS privacy controls work. An app doesn't get to 'see all your photos' just because you grant photo access, you still have to select which photos to put in the app. Same goes for camera, that just let's the app pull up the camera interface, not be able to access it 24/7 for whatever purpose they want. Same with the mic.

The apps do get permission to see all photos. How else would facebook or google photos automatically upload all your photos. Both apps have the option to do this. It requires no extra permissions on your photos and you don't have to select anything. It just requires giving permission once to "photos"

Re: Our Approach to Privacy

#92

Post by ahelwer »

gallerdude wrote: post #51

Privacy is one of those things I can't tangibly describe why I like it, but it just feels good to know that nothing is being saved, even in contrast to just targeting you for ads and nothing else.

I like it because of this: imagine you're having an intimate conversation with your best friend. In the room silently sit representatives from Google, Facebook, and your government. Before you speak, you (sub)consciously transform your thoughts and phrasing taking into account both the theory of mind of your friend, and those other organizations. This necessarily has low-level overhead, and results in a less-intimate conversation.

Privacy means you only have to care about communicating with the person with whom you're communicating. Organations with incomprehensible motives are cut out of the loop. You can be yourself, not a self-censoring corporate-approved robot.

Re: Our Approach to Privacy

#93

Post by zachlatta »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #61
gallerdude wrote: post #51

Privacy is one of those things I can't tangibly describe why I like it, but it just feels good to know that nothing is being saved, even in contrast to just targeting you for ads and nothing else.

We have a track record of things going south, fast, for societies that sacrifice privacy. It makes sense to tread warily with it.

Can you give a few examples?

Re: Our Approach to Privacy

#94

Post by mhovan »

ikawe wrote: post #15
3825 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry for the silly question. I don't own a mac or an iPhone anymore. My understanding is you can sideload apps on your own iPhone from your own mac running xcode. Are there limitations to what kind of apps you can side load using xcode?

Nothing installed that way can receive push notifications, though not all apps need or use then.

Not strictly true. I regularly test push notifications on sideloaded builds at client sites. Getting provisioning profiles and certificates setup correctly (especially on all extensions) is a bit cumbersome. To get those certificates may require an Apple enterprise developer account. And the builds signed this way are not debuggable.

Re: Our Approach to Privacy

#95

Post by Fnoord »

jvican wrote: post #48

After reading this, I have two questions: 1. Are there any statistics showing the ratio of security issues between Android and iOS? 2. What's the most common phone among security researchers? To be honest, I'm wary of believing this, but I own a Nexus and if I had to give the benefit of the doubt to either Google or Apple, it would most certainly be Apple because they don't make business out of my data (or, not as mu…

> 2. What's the most common phone among security researchers?

Not sure about which phone Schneier uses, but he argues that having a smartphone is a logical choice in today's society. However he also brings a nuance to that: that we have the pragmatic choice of leaving our smartphone at home instead of taking it with us, and that we should consider that.

Keep in mind a dumbphone also has big brother capabilities. Just likely less precise/severe (assuming no remote holes).

Re: Our Approach to Privacy

#96

Post by raarts »

maxpert wrote: post #19

At least one company is "trying" keep my photos private. The other day Google Photo told my wife it had prepared an album for our trip to SFO. We were surprised because she already disabled Geo-tagging but whataya know... Google still figured it out!

Did you book a hotel/airbnb/flight and received a confirmation mail in your Google email account?

Re: Our Approach to Privacy

#97

Post by JumpCrisscross »

zachlatta wrote: post #93
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have a track record of things going south, fast, for societies that sacrifice privacy. It makes sense to tread warily with it.

Can you give a few examples?

Pretty much every authoritarian overthrow that became genocidal relied on a previous bureaucracy's meticulous record keeping.

Re: Our Approach to Privacy

#98

Post by mattnewton »

LeoPanthera wrote: post #79
guyfawkes303 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you mis-understand how iOS privacy controls work. An app doesn't get to 'see all your photos' just because you grant photo access, you still have to select which photos to put in the app. Same goes for camera, that just let's the app pull up the camera interface, not be able to access it 24/7 for whatever purpose they want. Same with the mic.

I don't think this is correct. The Facebook app regularly shows me all the photos I have taken today and asks if I want to post any of them.

The Facebook mobile website can't do any of this, is just as functional, and easier on your battery life. I highly recommend it!

Re: Our Approach to Privacy

#99

Post by jvican »

microtonal wrote: post #88
jvican wrote: post #48

After reading this, I have two questions: 1. Are there any statistics showing the ratio of security issues between Android and iOS? 2. What's the most common phone among security researchers? To be honest, I'm wary of believing this, but I own a Nexus and if I had to give the benefit of the doubt to either Google or Apple, it would most certainly be Apple because they don't make business out of my data (or, not as mu…

FWIW tptacek and a few others recommend iPhones for journalists: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13798321

Sounds about what I was looking for. Thanks!

Re: Our Approach to Privacy

#100

Post by forapurpose »

Shank wrote: post #72
titanomachy wrote: post #58

How much of this can be independently verified? I suppose we just need to take their word for it?

It all boils down to what you see in the public. The FBI was trying to get Apple to create an iOS variant to extract data from a device, to the point where Tim Cook wrote a letter refusing to do so and was willing to fight it in court. In a similar fashion, Apple has given talks and white papers on iOS security. In tandem with these well documented white papers and talks discussing the internal functions of iOS, we h…

Perhaps both the FBI and Apple had a chance at good PR for their causes, and the FBI had a chance to set legal precedent, so neither admitted that the FBI could break in if needed.

The idea that iPhones were inaccessible to highly-resourced attackers like the U.S. government seems unbelievable. Everything has security holes, even if they are expensive to discover or exploit; the U.S. government's resources are immense and the payoff - access to iPhones when needed - is clearly worthwhile. And in the end, when the PR debate had run its course, the FBI found a way in.

Post reply on HN