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

Apple Sign In

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 544 posts

Re: Apple Sign In

#131

Post by toyg »

jbeckham wrote: post #53

Maybe I'm cynical, but this looks more like a data hording scheme than a protect my privacy enhancement. If I use Google to sign in, Google and the app has that data and can monetize it. Now if I sign in using Apple, they are going to have the data to monetize. They may keep the app from getting my information, but that means that their data is better than someone else's data, so it is more valuable. Also, they are g…

The difference is that one is a hardware company making services to sell devices; the other is an advertising company making services to get more data for ads. One of them can live without your data, the other cannot.

Re: Apple Sign In

#132

Post by throwayEngineer »

prdonahue wrote: post #78
jbeckham wrote: post #53

Maybe I'm cynical, but this looks more like a data hording scheme than a protect my privacy enhancement. If I use Google to sign in, Google and the app has that data and can monetize it. Now if I sign in using Apple, they are going to have the data to monetize. They may keep the app from getting my information, but that means that their data is better than someone else's data, so it is more valuable. Also, they are g…

Who do you trust more _not_ to do sketchy stuff with your data, Apple or Google? For me it's unequivocally Apple.

For me, Apple.

Google isn't outwardly evil.

Apple being anti consumer and anti developer really show you who Apple works for.

Re: Apple Sign In

#133

Post by apetresc »

mediocrejoker wrote: post #69
dyarosla wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Devils advocate: ‘Error: We love Apple and anonymity but we require a real email address to prevent fraud and to properly secure your account. Please enter your real email address.’

This is going to be a tough sell to your marketing dept I think.

It's usually the marketing department asking for e-mail addresses in the first place.

Re: Apple Sign In

#134

Post by throwayEngineer »

TomVDB wrote: post #119
y4mi wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither would be the only sane choice. Multinational corporations will always screw individual customers for profit. And the issue with trusting any entity with data isn't really what it will do with it today. The bigger problem is what the entity will do with it tomorrow - under new leadership. It might also be interesting to know that Apple is also in the business of selling "relevant adds". Its a tiny amount if co…

The question was not "who do you trust", but "who do you trust more ". Given that Google's business model depends on data sharing whereas Apple has made privacy one of their core features, I think the answer has to be Apple, even if you don't trust them entirely.

Apple has a longer list of lies and unethical events than Google.

"No our antenna and keyboards don't break, that's the users fault."

Re: Apple Sign In

#135

Post by golergka »

w3rhn2j34oh5o wrote: post #121
dpq wrote: post #58

Sounds like a good time to remind people about Telegram having a similar function for quite some time now. And just yesterday they announced a feature to simplify logging into web sites using TG bots: https://telegram.org/blog/privacy-discussions-web-bots It might be a personal choice, but for stuff when privacy is really important I'd definitely pick Telegram over Apple, no matter how much the latter claims to keep…

Telegram is unencrypted by default. All standard messages are stored on the server. Telegrams secret chat mode (end-to-end encryption) uses home made cryptography, and has been panned by experts in past. All group chat is in the clear and stored on the server. This is not the case with imessage. Comparing Telegram to iMessage, telegram is not in the same league as Apple. I don't trust either from TLA's or well funded…

> All standard messages are stored on the server.

It's a feature: history synchronization between different devices and fast search through hundreds of thousands of messages is, for most uses and users, more important than concerns that Telegram or nation-state level attackers (one capable of silently breaching Telegram infrastructure) would choose to read your chats.

Re: Apple Sign In

#136

Post by thrill »

I updated my AppleID since I haven't used it in years (have other devices) in anticipation of implementing this as soon as it's available on a site I'm working on. It appeared they offered two-factor authentication to get away from those 1990's type of security questions. Ah, not so fast - 2FA is only enabled with Apple devices. Poor play there, Apple. This service looks like something sorely needed - bring the rest of the flock into the fold and let everyone plug in their Yubi key.

Re: Apple Sign In

#138

Post by apetresc »

dyarosla wrote: post #51
saagarjha wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds like a way to get your app rejected for abusing APIs.

In an app I agree. On a website signup however..?

It would work roughly the same way. Integrating an OAuth provider like this requires registering an application with revokable ClientIDs, so Apple can technically pull them just as easily as they can pull Apps.

(It remains to be seen if they'll put in the legwork to actually police these things, though)

Re: Apple Sign In

#139

Post by reaperducer »

hprotagonist wrote: post #60
snarf21 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that it is great. I'm not sure how we convince people to not signup on sites that don't offer this SSO option. I've always struggled with the question of 'How do we convince people to care about privacy when they post their location and meal to a public social media every hour?'.

My rule, and it is a semi-idiotic one, is "i don't impulse buy from independent merchant websites that don't support apple pay at checkout". I usually email them after, too. "I actually clicked through your instagram ad, looked at some clothes that looked nice, and didn't buy anything because I was on my phone and didn't want to make a new account and add credentials to my password manager. Have you considered adding…

It's dumb that so many sites require you to create an account just to buy something from them.

One of the reasons I get lunch from Panera and Pei Wei is because I can check out on my phone as a guest when I order ahead.

Heck, even fleaBay lets you do a guest check out now. That was what made me consider using it again.

Re: Apple Sign In

#140

Post by dan-robertson »

jiveturkey wrote: post #117
anbop wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And being done by Apple, most services can’t just reject these the way they do with Mailinator addresses, since it would be throwing away a giant chunk of their revenue. Apps with huge consumer demand like Uber or Facebook could get away with it, but not the vast majority of apps.

I think this will be proven wrong. Do you think that the folks using Mailinator are strictly non-Apple users? As an Apple user that signs up with a mailinator ID, if rejected I either move on or use a more palatable address, as the case may be depending on my desire to use that service. The same will hold true for any private appleid address.

I think there are two differences here:

1. Services have little incentive to support mailinator, and indeed may deliberately choose not to if they feel it is leading to signups they don’t like. On the other hand it would be hard to argue with an incentive like the App Store requiring you to support apple’s service.

2. Because the service is built in to apple’s systems there seems to be an implicit contract that apple wont let it be abused for the purposes that many sites claim mailinator is used for (because it isn’t useful to apple customers if sites don’t trust it and it). So they might be more willing to accept these email addresses.

I guess neither of these help services like mailinator gain credibility.

Post reply on HN