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

Apple’s Anti-Tracking Plans for iPhone

foundation.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 403 posts

Re: Apple’s Anti-Tracking Plans for iPhone

#221

Post by snarf21 »

jmull wrote: post #148
superkuh wrote: post #145

Apple can make an anti-tracking computer but nothing they do can make an anti-tracking phone. It is a "cell" phone. The very nature of cell phones means the basestations have to decide where you are and which cell takes your connections. With precise clocks and multi-lateration the position of your handset is known to about 50m. All US telco keep this location data (which is constantly updated) for 2 to 5 years. And…

This is about tracking your internet activity, not physical location/movements.

Your carrier has that correlation. They route all your packets. It doesn't matter if it is Comcast at home or Verizon/Att on the go. They know where you live and work and track you 24/7. Facebook is simply going to make a deal to have a unique ID added to URL metadata and then tracking is even more trivial. We need legislation to guarantee true net neutrality. Just like the electric company doesn't track/sell what I use my electricity on, the ISP shouldn't track/sell what I use my data.

Re: Apple’s Anti-Tracking Plans for iPhone

#222

Post by rndgermandude »

jefftk wrote: post #204
rndgermandude wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ad fraud... How exactly is this my problem as a consumer? This sounds pretty much like a "you" (ad networks and advertisers) problem... So why should you be allowed to spy on me - who never defrauded any advertisers - to fix your problem?

> How exactly is this my problem as a consumer? When you use a service that is funded by advertising, the service only gets that funding because the advertisers trust that they are getting their ads in front of real users. Some advertisers are able to precisely measure the quality of their traffic, for example by seeing whether the traffic they get buys things, but most are in businesses where that's not possible (no…

I like the second part of your answer. Indeed, if you wanted something like a way to id bad actors, you could do some scheme where the OS (or browser or even secondary service) could do some form of attestation that isn't trackable and has even stronger guarantees than some unauthenticated unique id has. If Apple and Google can make their Corona Tracking APIs untrackable by third parties, then untrackable "valid device" APIs should be possible and feasible as well.

But you cannot make this my problem by saying "let me spy on you. or your shit gets more expensive, or sites have to close". That sounds too much like "an offer you cannot refuse". I will not surrender my privacy for failed business models.

Re: Apple’s Anti-Tracking Plans for iPhone

#223

Post by jforman »

rndgermandude wrote: post #202
jforman wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it makes advertising more expensive, which in turn makes the products and services you use more expensive.

I honestly want to see evidence for this claim. Sounds to me it makes running an ad network harder and therefore probably more expensive, but it is far from a certainty that this translates into advertisers' willingness to pay more (and pass it on to consumers). Personally, I use ads as a signal to avoid buying certain products. If the ads are too prominent and omnipresent, it's an indication for me that I would be p…

Let's say you're a startup trying to advertise on Google, and somebody has paid a bot network to fraudulently click on your ads. Now Google can't detect that those clicks are fraudulent, so you're billed for them.

Your channel efficiency unavoidably goes down, which increases your cost of customer acquisition because your other channels cannot pick up all of the slack.

Increasing the cost of customer acquisition is going to be bad for your business. You will either need to reduce costs (by hiring less, for example), or increase your prices.

Re: Apple’s Anti-Tracking Plans for iPhone

#224

Post by BlueTemplar »

izacus wrote: post #88
BlueTemplar wrote: post #4

As a reminder, most popular Android apps send data to Facebook : https://9to5google.com/2018/12/31/android-apps-facebook/

As a reminder (from first hand experience with mobile development for major companies), the iOS versions of those apps do the same. Even more so, all of those tracking SDKs are targeting iOS first, Android second. Please don't feel safe on iOS just because Apple marketing is blasting misleading claims at you.

That's weird. How come they say nothing about iOS?

Re: Apple’s Anti-Tracking Plans for iPhone

#225

Post by sbuk »

EwanToo wrote: post #93
tchalla wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think are the possible issues for full encryption of iCloud backups?

This is the issue with iCloud backups not being encrypted: https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-apple-fbi-icloud-exclusive... Not saying I agree or disagree with it, but it's something worth highlighting

News agencies get things wrong. 'Sources' are often times extremely unreliable, or don't always present the whole picture. Not that I'm absolving Apple here, just that I've been indirectly on the receiving end of 'sources' and Reuters being technically right, but very, very wrong.

Re: Apple’s Anti-Tracking Plans for iPhone

#226

Post by airstrike »

jefftk wrote: post #204
rndgermandude wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ad fraud... How exactly is this my problem as a consumer? This sounds pretty much like a "you" (ad networks and advertisers) problem... So why should you be allowed to spy on me - who never defrauded any advertisers - to fix your problem?

> How exactly is this my problem as a consumer? When you use a service that is funded by advertising, the service only gets that funding because the advertisers trust that they are getting their ads in front of real users. Some advertisers are able to precisely measure the quality of their traffic, for example by seeing whether the traffic they get buys things, but most are in businesses where that's not possible (no…

> Very likely, less funding for the service hurts you as a consumer

Define "hurt".

I'd rather make a decision to pay $5/month for a service than to be the product and get spied on

Re: Apple’s Anti-Tracking Plans for iPhone

#227

Post by nvrspyx »

jefftk wrote: post #204
rndgermandude wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ad fraud... How exactly is this my problem as a consumer? This sounds pretty much like a "you" (ad networks and advertisers) problem... So why should you be allowed to spy on me - who never defrauded any advertisers - to fix your problem?

> How exactly is this my problem as a consumer? When you use a service that is funded by advertising, the service only gets that funding because the advertisers trust that they are getting their ads in front of real users. Some advertisers are able to precisely measure the quality of their traffic, for example by seeing whether the traffic they get buys things, but most are in businesses where that's not possible (no…

Then I suppose businesses will need to adapt, as businesses have for hundreds of years, either away from relying on advertisements or going back to old-school, non-intrusive, manual ad placements that don't rely on clicks, targeting, and tracking.

Re: Apple’s Anti-Tracking Plans for iPhone

#228

Post by alwillis »

fbelzile wrote: post #205
LC_ALL wrote: post #50

Say what you want about Apple but they are by far the most privacy focused big company. Their income is from selling physical devices. Typical megacorps in 2020 are leveraging economies of scale to sell their users' attention. Apple has a unique value add in that when their users benefit they benefit. Sent from my Thinkpad.

> Their income is from selling physical devices. Not entirely true anymore: 1) About $8-12 billion paid by Google to have their search engine default. [1] 2) About $20 billion from their 15-30% cut of third party app developers. Where the App Store is protected from competition. [2] 3) Apple services (like Apple TV+), which collects usage data for itself and third parties. [3] [1] https://www.macrumors.com/2020/10/25…

The vast majority of Apple's revenue is from selling hardware. Yes, there's revenue from services, which is growing fast.

The trailing 12 month revenue for Mac, iPhone, iPad and Apple Watch (+ HomePod, AirPods, etc.) was over $220 billion.

And while $20 billion is not nothing, it's actually not that big a deal for Apple, especially when you consider its $2 trillion market cap.

Re: Apple’s Anti-Tracking Plans for iPhone

#229

Post by mhb »

jforman wrote: post #223
rndgermandude wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly want to see evidence for this claim. Sounds to me it makes running an ad network harder and therefore probably more expensive, but it is far from a certainty that this translates into advertisers' willingness to pay more (and pass it on to consumers). Personally, I use ads as a signal to avoid buying certain products. If the ads are too prominent and omnipresent, it's an indication for me that I would be p…

Let's say you're a startup trying to advertise on Google, and somebody has paid a bot network to fraudulently click on your ads. Now Google can't detect that those clicks are fraudulent, so you're billed for them. Your channel efficiency unavoidably goes down, which increases your cost of customer acquisition because your other channels cannot pick up all of the slack. Increasing the cost of customer acquisition is g…

This is a pretty status quo biased view. Maybe stronger privacy protection enables a startup search engine (or whatever) with a more privacy oriented funding method which wasn't thought viable before.

Re: Apple’s Anti-Tracking Plans for iPhone

#230

Post by alwillis »

pradn wrote: post #157
LC_ALL wrote: post #50

Say what you want about Apple but they are by far the most privacy focused big company. Their income is from selling physical devices. Typical megacorps in 2020 are leveraging economies of scale to sell their users' attention. Apple has a unique value add in that when their users benefit they benefit. Sent from my Thinkpad.

Apple gets on the order of $12 billion a year from Google to make Google Search the default search engine in iOS. All that money comes from ads. They care about privacy until it hits their pocketbook.

Apple gets on the order of $12 billion a year from Google to make Google Search the default search engine in iOS. All that money comes from ads.

It's a lot of money, but it's pocket change for Apple in the scheme of things—$220 billion in hardware revenue and a $2 trillion market cap.

Google needs to pay it far more than Apple needs the money. Google knows Apple customers are far more lucrative than Android customers.

Post reply on HN