11–20 of 452 posts
Not mentioned in the headline: When the user is _not_ logged in, iOS collects "location" whereas Android does not. I am actually a little surprised that iOS would gather this information. What use would it serve?
Not mentioned in the headline: When the user is _not_ logged in, iOS collects "location" whereas Android does not. I am actually a little surprised that iOS would gather this information. What use would it serve?
Find My Phone? It is a choice to enroll in this, and it’s mighty convenient when you lose or get your phone stolen.
Not mentioned in the headline: When the user is _not_ logged in, iOS collects "location" whereas Android does not. I am actually a little surprised that iOS would gather this information. What use would it serve?
Generally speaking, Apple is drastically better about location services privacy. For instance, Apple Maps does not tie any location data nor direction requests to your Apple ID, and regularly rotates identifiers for devices used by the service: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT212039
Not mentioned in the headline: When the user is _not_ logged in, iOS collects "location" whereas Android does not. I am actually a little surprised that iOS would gather this information. What use would it serve?
Find My Phone? It is a choice to enroll in this, and it’s mighty convenient when you lose or get your phone stolen.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Find My Phone? It is a choice to enroll in this, and it’s mighty convenient when you lose or get your phone stolen.
That works when you're not logged in?
That being said, my theory is in another comment.
I mean at this point it's obvious if you're using a digital device data is going to be collected, that's part of society and living in the 21st century; could be your toothbrush, fridge, washing machine, car...All these devices generate data that is going to be collected. It's also changing how crime is investigated; Google can be asked for a list of smartphones in an area at a given time, can be used to collect evid…
While I agree with this in principle, I've never really understood why we forgive poor user behaviour when it comes to computers when we don't do the same with basically any other tool humans regularly use, despite the negative consequences being comparable, I don't think it's reasonable to expect people to just quietly accept 'tracking's just the way it is, deal with it.'
That doesn't come down to poor user behaviour in that case, it comes down to malicious behaviour by device manufacturers and software developers in the name of profit.
It's all well and good to expect users to take steps to deal with that behaviour, but it shouldn't just be accepted that, 'that's just the way it is.' And companies should be held accountable for at least the deceit that surrounds it.
Just being honest and open about it all would be a start. At least then you could make the excuse 'oh well the user should have tried harder to not be tracked.' Because they have a fair chance of knowing where and how they're being tracked.
This current system of deceit and bullshit is the problem.
Another big thing about Android is anti-abuse, keeping people from running ad click fraud in apps running on emulators. That is the whole DroidGuard thing that the paper mentions and doesn't explore further. It is a device-specific virtual machine and bytecode for the virtual machine which is intended to authenticate it as a real device, not an emulator.
Anyway check out this slide deck for how Google SRE views mobile as being in their world: https://www.usenix.org/sites/default/files/conference/protec...
PS that team is called MISRE, pronounced "misery" and some of the founders of that team migrated from "SAD SRE" make of that what you will.