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

My Mac contacted 63 different Apple owned domains in an hour, while not is use

appaddict.app

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 218 posts

Re: My Mac contacted 63 different Apple owned domains in an hour, while not is use

#191

Post by lapcat »

simondotau wrote: post #188
lapcat wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The way I see it is either you trust Apple or you don’t. That's so obviously a false dichotomy.

That’s what you disagree with? If anything, I was expecting someone to insist that it’s not unreasonable to run software from a company you don’t trust. That’s an easy argument to steel-man, because there are many ways to run untrusted software safely. But if you think that trust itself is a false dichotomy, I’d love to hear what that sounds like. I’m struggling to think of a good faith steel-man of this assertion.

> But if you think that trust itself is a false dichotomy, I’d love to hear what that sounds like. I’m struggling to think of a good faith steel-man of this assertion.

There are obviously levels of trust. I'm truly baffled that you're struggling with this.

Your trust in a person, or a company, can increase or decrease over time. You can trust someone with some tasks but not with other tasks. Again, this is so incredibly obvious, I'm not sure why I have to point it out.

Re: My Mac contacted 63 different Apple owned domains in an hour, while not is use

#192

Post by 1659447091 »

righthand wrote: post #68
jamesy0ung wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple is nowhere near as evil as Microsoft, so I’m willing to put up with it.

Apple has been involved in all the same government spying programs as Microsoft. They do not offer any services or products with E2E encryption that they do not control the key too.

> They do not offer any services or products with E2E encryption that they do not control the key too.

Are you saying that Apple still has the keys when Advanced Data Protection is turned on? And has access to the covered data even though they say the keys are only on the trusted devices?

Re: My Mac contacted 63 different Apple owned domains in an hour, while not is use

#193

Post by simondotau »

lapcat wrote: post #191
simondotau wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s what you disagree with? If anything, I was expecting someone to insist that it’s not unreasonable to run software from a company you don’t trust. That’s an easy argument to steel-man, because there are many ways to run untrusted software safely. But if you think that trust itself is a false dichotomy, I’d love to hear what that sounds like. I’m struggling to think of a good faith steel-man of this assertion.

> But if you think that trust itself is a false dichotomy, I’d love to hear what that sounds like. I’m struggling to think of a good faith steel-man of this assertion. There are obviously levels of trust. I'm truly baffled that you're struggling with this. Your trust in a person, or a company, can increase or decrease over time. You can trust someone with some tasks but not with other tasks. Again, this is so incredi…

What you’re describing is an assessment of risk associated with using untrusted software. There are absolutely levels of risk. I don’t trust Nintendo, but I don’t need to trust them in order to play Mario.

Re: My Mac contacted 63 different Apple owned domains in an hour, while not is use

#194

Post by pabs3 »

owebmaster wrote: post #52
jbrooks84 wrote: post #49

Is this the first time you are monitoring traffic of any modern consumer devices connected to the Internet?

Have you tried GNU/Linux?

The Linux distros still have privacy issues too.

https://wiki.debian.org/PrivacyIssues

Re: My Mac contacted 63 different Apple owned domains in an hour, while not is use

#195

Post by vbezhenar »

zamfi wrote: post #75
vbezhenar wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My Macbook used to grind CPU for 10-20 minutes after every power on. That happened with literally fresh install and it does it every time. I don't know why does it do that. May be some indexing? This lack of transparency was one of the reasons for me switching to Linux too. I don't want my OS to do anything at all in background, that I didn't explicitly configured to. I want to be in full control of my software. Linu…

Huh, which process was doing this grinding on your MacBook?

Generally it's mds_stores, but sometimes there are other ones which I don't remember atm. But mds_stores is the biggest offender.

Re: My Mac contacted 63 different Apple owned domains in an hour, while not is use

#196

Post by amelius »

al_borland wrote: post #184
amelius wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Which then becomes a question of how much time/money to they invest in features for 1% of users? The problem with Apple is that __anyone__ sits in a 1% group of users in one way or the other. But they try to make a one-size-fits-all product. This is in contrast to Linux where everybody can do whatever they like, and most things are opt-in rather than opt-out.

Apple ships to satisfy the 80%. 3rd party devs generally fill the needs of the 20% in various ways. This is no different with Linux. How many Linux users use a desktop environment as-is without any plugins or tweaks? How many Arch users don’t have a single package from the AUR? There are tools like Little Snitch on macOS to monitor and block all kind of network traffic.

The problem is that you have to tweak it the wrong way. Products you buy should not invade your privacy by default.

Note that this holds for many other products too. So if you don't mind Apple invading your privacy, you should not complain about Meta, Google, your car, etc.

Re: My Mac contacted 63 different Apple owned domains in an hour, while not is use

#197

Post by danaris »

ImJamal wrote: post #178
danaris wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not every Apple service is E2E encrypted, but some of them (like iMessage) are, and it's 100% real E2E.

If you do a forgot password and move to a new device do you lose all your chats?

AFAIK, if you can't get a previous device to authenticate your new device, you will indeed lose your chat history. However, I have several devices that can always authenticate for new ones, so I can't verify this empirically.

Re: My Mac contacted 63 different Apple owned domains in an hour, while not is use

#198

Post by PinguTS »

j_w wrote: post #104
PinguTS wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you think push should work? Any push service works this way. The client contacts the server to be updated. The server gives a no data or a data response. The server cannot magically contact the client.

Well, the server could contact the client. The client would just need to be listening on a port/address that the server knows. Which is completely infeasible for 99.99% of end user devices.

Well, then would work for less then 50%.

The majority of end user devices are run from within private networks protected from the Internet. If you have connected to your cell provider, then in the majority the cell providers are running their own private networks. For one reason the IPv4 address space is limited as such, that there are no other possibilities. IPv4 is still the important protocol compared to IPv6. Second, it is that those providers, want to protect you. Some don't even allow cross communication.

If you devices are connected with Wifi, then there is the very same situation. There is almost no campus, commercial, and home network, that gives you public route-able IP addresses. I only know a view deployments were you get public route-able IP addresses at conferences like C3, EMF, and alike.

tl/dr: No, the end user devices is not easily to reach without additional infrastructure.

Re: My Mac contacted 63 different Apple owned domains in an hour, while not is use

#199

Post by PinguTS »

nothrabannosir wrote: post #190
baby_souffle wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, sms is "actually push" all the way down to the transport layer. As far as I know, this is still what push notifications are built upon for an idle/sleeping device. Carrier infrastructure knows which tower you last connected to, instructs that specific tower to broadcast a message telling your phone to wake up and fetch the remaining 80% of the notification content (the sms bit is usually just enough for your dev…

iOS or Android push notifications (can) use SMS for notifying the client that a new message is available ? That’s lovely. Do you have any links or any keywords to find more ? All I can find online is that iOS uses TCP (XMPP in fact :o TIL. )

No, Apple push cannot use SMS/Text. You need a cell modem to have working SMS/Text. Except the phone itself, most of the devices have no cell modem. Then Apple would need to keep a directory of all the cell phone numbers, because that is the way how the cell modem is addressed.

Re: My Mac contacted 63 different Apple owned domains in an hour, while not is use

#200

Post by ffsm8 »

DrBenCarson wrote: post #187
ffsm8 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can see where you're coming from, but I still feel like you might be putting too much trust into how apple splits their revenue in documents as they're provided to the public. I'm not saying that the numbers are false, but apple can ultimately freely choose how to categorize their revenue itself. From my point of view, their advertising revenue inherently cannot be split from their app store revenue. It's akin to m…

App Store and ad revenue are part of the same category

But in aggregate, it's 25%, right?

I'd consider that a majority share, or would you say the term should only apply if it's over 50%? I considered it to be a majority share because it's a significant chunk of the total revenue and not just a minor footnote, but looking back, "a significant amount" would've probably been better

Post reply on HN