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

Private Cloud Compute: A new frontier for AI privacy in the cloud

security.apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 393 posts

Re: Private Cloud Compute: A new frontier for AI privacy in the cloud

#231

Post by padolsey »

theshrike79 wrote: post #212
chem83 wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you think that internal access control at Apple is any better than Google's, Microsoft's or OpenAI's? Google employees have long reported that you can't access user data with standard credentials, for example. Also, what makes you think that Apple's investments on chip design and OS is superior to Google's? Google is known for OpenTitan and other in-house silicon projects. It's also been working in secure…

> What makes you think that internal access control at Apple is any better There are multiple verified stories on the lengths Apple goes internally to keep things secret. I saw a talk years ago about (I think) booting up some bits of the iCloud infrastructure, which needed two different USB keys with different keys to boot up. Then both keys were destroyed so that nobody knows the encryption keys and can't decrypt th…

What's funny is that, in all these orgs, it ends up being the low-tech vulns that compromise you in the end. Physical access, social engineering, etc. However, I'm really impressed by the technical lengths Apples goes to though. The key-burning thing reminds me of ICANN' Root KSK Ceremonies.

Re: Private Cloud Compute: A new frontier for AI privacy in the cloud

#232

Post by rekoil »

al_borland wrote: post #137
gpm wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually thought one notable thing in the presentation was that they spent all this time talking about their new private cloud compute architecture. And then showed that they have a prompt asking if you're ok sending the data to OpenAI. Presumably because despite OpenAI promising not to use your data (a promise apple relayed) OpenAI didn't buy into this new architecture.

Thank you for mentioning this. I thought I was going crazy, because I heard this too, but kept seeing comment after comment on other sites asking if a person could choose not to use OpenAI, or that it was happening magically in the background. The way I heard it, the user was in control. I think this goes back to what Steve said in 2010. https://youtube.com/watch?v=Ij-jlF98SzA And yes, while the data might not be lin…

I was under the impression that the OpenAI integrations were more about content generation and correction than the Apple Intelligence-driven personal stuff.

Re: Private Cloud Compute: A new frontier for AI privacy in the cloud

#233

Post by andersa »

dwaite wrote: post #227
TeMPOraL wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> unless it's open source and the servers decentralized, you are always trusting SOMEONE Specifically, open-source and self-hostable . Open source doesn't save you if people can't run their own servers, because you never know whether what's in the public repo is the exact same thing that's running on the cloud servers.

You can by having an attestation of the signed software components up from the secure boot process, and having the client device validate said attestation corresponds to the known public version of each component, and randomize client connections across infrastructure. Other than obvious "open source software isn't perfectly secure" attack scenarios, this would require a non-targeted hardware attack, where the entire…

Usually this is done the other way around - servers verifying client devices using a chip the manufacturer put in them and fully trusts. They can trust it, because it's virtually impossible for you (the user) to modify the behavior of this chip. However, you can't put something in Apple's server. So if you don't trust Apple, this improves the trust by... 0%.

Their device says it's been attested. Has it? Who knows? They control the hardware, so can just make the server attest whatever they want, even if it's not true. It'd be trivial to just use a fake hash for the system volume data. You didn't build the attestation chip. You will never find out.

Happy to be proven wrong here, but at first glance the whole idea seems like a sham. This is security theater. It does nothing.

Re: Private Cloud Compute: A new frontier for AI privacy in the cloud

#234

Post by dialup_sounds »

detourdog wrote: post #211
fastball wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And (basically) nobody running linux is individually verifying the source code of every little piece of software that goes into it (maybe Linus is), so you're still trusting someone .

I can’t even find the appropriate documentation.

It's all on Discord now.

Re: Private Cloud Compute: A new frontier for AI privacy in the cloud

#235

Post by p_l »

theshrike79 wrote: post #212
chem83 wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you think that internal access control at Apple is any better than Google's, Microsoft's or OpenAI's? Google employees have long reported that you can't access user data with standard credentials, for example. Also, what makes you think that Apple's investments on chip design and OS is superior to Google's? Google is known for OpenTitan and other in-house silicon projects. It's also been working in secure…

> What makes you think that internal access control at Apple is any better There are multiple verified stories on the lengths Apple goes internally to keep things secret. I saw a talk years ago about (I think) booting up some bits of the iCloud infrastructure, which needed two different USB keys with different keys to boot up. Then both keys were destroyed so that nobody knows the encryption keys and can't decrypt th…

The stories about Apple keeping things secret usually go about protecting their business secrets from normal people, up to doing probably illegal actions.

Using deniable, one-time keys etc. are... not that unusual. In fact I'd say I'm more worried about the use of random USB keys there instead of proper KMS system.

(There are similar stories with how doing a cold start can be difficult when you end up with a loop in your access controls, from Google, where a fortunately simulated cold-start showed that they couldn't access necessary KMS physically to bootstrap the system... because access controls depended, after many layers, on the system to be cold-started).

Re: Private Cloud Compute: A new frontier for AI privacy in the cloud

#236

Post by nisten »

Complete horseshit marketing speak.

Was the cloud non-private before? Was it not secure in the first place? Do my Siri searches no longer end up as google ads metadata now? Are the feds no longer able to get rubber stamp access to my i C L O U D now?

You are a naive idiot for believing that this is anything but security theater to adress the emotional needs of AI anxiety in and outside the company.

Just my opinion.

Re: Private Cloud Compute: A new frontier for AI privacy in the cloud

#237

Post by p_l »

Sporktacular wrote: post #220
noahtallen wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think that’s completely fair. It basically puts Apple in the same bucket as Google or OpenAI. Google obviously tracks everything you do for ads, recommendations, AI, you name it. They don’t even hide it, it’s a core part of their business model. Apple, on the other hand, has made a pretty serious effort to ensure that no employee can access your data on these AI systems. That’s hugely different! They’re going…

"ensuring that clients will refuse to talk to non-audited systems." I'm trying to understand if this is really possible. I know they claim so but is there any info on how this would prevent Apple from executing different code to what is presented for audit?

Unless they pass all keys authorized by the system to third parties that ensure appropriate auditing, none.

And at least after my experiences with T2 chip, I consider Apple devices to be always owned by Apple first...

Re: Private Cloud Compute: A new frontier for AI privacy in the cloud

#238

Post by p_l »

andersa wrote: post #233
dwaite wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can by having an attestation of the signed software components up from the secure boot process, and having the client device validate said attestation corresponds to the known public version of each component, and randomize client connections across infrastructure. Other than obvious "open source software isn't perfectly secure" attack scenarios, this would require a non-targeted hardware attack, where the entire…

Usually this is done the other way around - servers verifying client devices using a chip the manufacturer put in them and fully trusts. They can trust it, because it's virtually impossible for you (the user) to modify the behavior of this chip. However, you can't put something in Apple's server. So if you don't trust Apple, this improves the trust by... 0%. Their device says it's been attested. Has it? Who knows? Th…

Usually the attestation systems operate on neither side having everything to compute a result that will match attestation requirements, and thus require that both server-side and client-side secret are involved in attestation process.

The big issue with Apple is that their attestation infrastructure is wholly private to them, you can't self-host (Android is a bit similar in that application using Google's attestation system have the same limitation, but you can in theory setup your own).

Re: Private Cloud Compute: A new frontier for AI privacy in the cloud

#239

Post by milkshakes »

p_l wrote: post #235
theshrike79 wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What makes you think that internal access control at Apple is any better There are multiple verified stories on the lengths Apple goes internally to keep things secret. I saw a talk years ago about (I think) booting up some bits of the iCloud infrastructure, which needed two different USB keys with different keys to boot up. Then both keys were destroyed so that nobody knows the encryption keys and can't decrypt th…

The stories about Apple keeping things secret usually go about protecting their business secrets from normal people, up to doing probably illegal actions. Using deniable, one-time keys etc. are... not that unusual. In fact I'd say I'm more worried about the use of random USB keys there instead of proper KMS system. (There are similar stories with how doing a cold start can be difficult when you end up with a loop in…

they used smartcards, not usb keys

Re: Private Cloud Compute: A new frontier for AI privacy in the cloud

#240

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

noahtallen wrote: post #178
hexage1814 wrote: post #168

The thing with cloud and with anything related to it, anything that connects to the internet somehow... is that, unless it's open source and the servers decentralized, you are always trusting SOMEONE. Sure, Apple might make their best to ensure nobody – but them – have access to your data... but Apple controls all the end points. It controls the updates your iPhone receives, it controls the servers where this happens…

I don’t think that’s completely fair. It basically puts Apple in the same bucket as Google or OpenAI. Google obviously tracks everything you do for ads, recommendations, AI, you name it. They don’t even hide it, it’s a core part of their business model. Apple, on the other hand, has made a pretty serious effort to ensure that no employee can access your data on these AI systems. That’s hugely different! They’re going…

"I think another facet of trust here is that a rather big part of Apple's business model is privacy. They've been very successful financially by creating products that generate money in other ways, and it's very much not necessary or even a sound business idea for them to do something else."

If a third party wants that data, whether the third party is an online criminal, government law enforcement or a "business partner", this idea that Apple's "business model" will somehow negate the downsides of "cloud computing", online advertising and internet privacy is futile. Moreover, it is a myth. Apple is spending more and more on ad services, we can see this in its SEC filings. Before he died, Steve Jobs was named on an Apple patent application for showing ads during boot. The company uses "privacy" as a marketing tactic. There is no evidence of an ideological or actual effort to avoid the so-called "tech" company "business model". Apple follows what these companies do. It considers them competitors. Apple collects a motherload of user data and metadata. A company that was serious about privacy would not do this. It's a cop out, not a trade off.

To truly avoid the risks of cloud computing, online advertising and associated privacy issues, choosing Apple instead of Google is a half-baked effort. Anyone who was serious about it would choose neither.

Of course, do what is necessary, trust whomever; no one is faulting anyone for making practical choices, but let's not pretend choosing Apple and trusting it solves these problems introduced by so-called "tech" company competitors. Apple pursues online advertising, cloud computing and data collection. All at the expense of privacy. With billions in cash on hand, it is one of the wealthiest companies on Earth, does it really need to do that.

In the good old days, we could call Apple a hardware company. The boundaries were clear. Those days are long gone. Connect an Apple computer to a network and watch what goes over the wire wth zero user input, destined for servers controlled by the mothership. There is nothing "private" about that design.

Post reply on HN