I'd be fine with this as long as it is an optional install. If the software is forced on you is where it becomes a problem. Apple could have the best intentions ever, but as mentioned in the article, if they have this capability the government, at some point, will come knocking.
Apple seeking to patent spyware
21–30 of 42 posts
Re: Apple seeking to patent spyware
#22Answers the question: why do normal people, when they know the EFF exists at all, think it is a joke?
Well I never understood the phrase "normal people", that's sort of like "the real world", but given that "most people"(choose your study and scary high percentage) can't identify which century the civil was fought it and believe the president is a muslim, it wouldn't surprise me that normal people would think that an organization dedicated to protected their constitutional and civil rights was a joke.
> an organization dedicated to protected their constitutional and civil rights
The appeal to emotion aside, that sounds like serious work, maybe they should avoid sensationalist blog posts and snarky little nicknames like "traitorware" that make them sound childish.
I certainly take them a little less seriously now than I did before I read the linked blog post.
Re: Apple seeking to patent spyware
#23Everyone here is talking about the sensationalistic headline from the EFF. What about all the hype and sensationalism that follows Apple products??
The EFF is trying to work in your best interests, for the sake of your privacy. Apple is not.
Re: Apple seeking to patent spyware
#24So as about a million comments on Slashdot -- about as Apple-hating a place as you'll find -- pointed out, this patent application is basically for the phone equivalent of OnStar's "someone stole my car, find it and shut it down" system, plus a couple extra features like taking a picture of the thief or detecting attempts to get through the passcode lock. The patent, if granted, will most likely be bogus, but the int…
Analogy problem: You can't steal your own car. This application, bogus or not, is targeted to the possibility that you steal your own phone.
This application, bogus or not, is targeted to the possibility that you steal your own phone.
If Apple wanted to do this to prevent legitimate owners from jailbreaking their own phones, then why bother patenting (and therefore publicizing) the system? Why not just do it?
Re: Apple seeking to patent spyware
#25So as about a million comments on Slashdot -- about as Apple-hating a place as you'll find -- pointed out, this patent application is basically for the phone equivalent of OnStar's "someone stole my car, find it and shut it down" system, plus a couple extra features like taking a picture of the thief or detecting attempts to get through the passcode lock. The patent, if granted, will most likely be bogus, but the int…
One interesting thing about OnStar is that it actually has been used for exactly the sort of remote bugging that the EFF fears Apple's program will get used for. http://news.cnet.com/2100-1029_3-5109435.html And they've also done this with other cell phones: http://www.zdnet.com/news/fbi-taps-cell-phone-mic-as-eavesdr... Incidentally, I note that the reasoning given for why the OnStar case was reversed on appeal was…
>One interesting thing about OnStar is that it actually has been used for exactly the sort of remote bugging that the EFF fears Apple's program will get used for.
Not quite the same thing, you're talking about the government using the OnStar system as a wiretap. In the government's case, they don't need an Apple-like system, they can just wiretap your phone with its built-in functions: http://news.cnet.com/2100-1029_3-6140191.html
Re: Apple seeking to patent spyware
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This application, bogus or not, is targeted to the possibility that you steal your own phone. Uh... how? And what sense does that even make? How can you steal what you already own exactly?
If Apple doesn't agree with you that you own the software on the phone, then jailbreaking your phone is "stealing" the software from them...
1. That doesn't even come close to technically incorrect.
2. Nothing in the application or idea of the software hints at such a use. A much more likely use case (the only sane one unless you're looking out for the black helicopters) is an extension of the existing "find my phone" set of features, which allow the phone's owner to locate and attempt to recover a lost or stolen piece of property
Re: Apple seeking to patent spyware
#27I'd be fine with this as long as it is an optional install. If the software is forced on you is where it becomes a problem. Apple could have the best intentions ever, but as mentioned in the article, if they have this capability the government, at some point, will come knocking.
"The Government" doesn't need this. Your standard phone already has everything it needs to locate you and tap your communications.
Re: Apple seeking to patent spyware
#28"traitorware"? Wow, that's not unnecessarily inflammatory at all!
They're taking after the RMS school of linkbait PR — a mix of activism that's too earnest for all but their most strident supporters and neologisms so punny that even your dad would groan at them.
True. But let's not make it sound like it's only a hackery community thing. Another example: Greenpeace (as opposed to other pro-enviornmental groups).
And depending on your world view, possibly Fox news. ;)
Re: Apple seeking to patent spyware
#29Everyone here is talking about the sensationalistic headline from the EFF. What about all the hype and sensationalism that follows Apple products?? The EFF is trying to work in your best interests, for the sake of your privacy. Apple is not.
The danger is that it could backfire... ever read the fairy tale of the child who cried wolf?
Re: Apple seeking to patent spyware
#30Talk about prior art, Google already does most of this.
I've had Prey installed for some time (though I've never needed to use it).
It doesn't do the biometrics stuff, but then neither does Google.