Apple loves privacy!

[magnifier661]

They are masters at PR, that's for sure. In this case, they declared it was not a breach and a week later sent a PR message that they toughened their security. PR indeed.

Thats being proactive. It's better to add more security. Being in a field of software security, you would agree no?

 

[andalusian]

Btw, Google clearly reads all my emails. So they can put up ads in Gmail for stuff mentioned in the messages.

God knows what other indexing they do, including the sites you visit that have ga tracking codes, purchases, any emails or texts sent via android devices, etc.

If they can read your email, they can hand it over unencrypted.

Of course they do. There are two ways of monetizing operations, directly (as Apple mostly does) or indirectly as Google does. Most companies have some kinds of a balance between the two (including Apple, I get surprisingly accurate iTunes email messages for my liking from them, so they clearly track some of my stuff, via the App Store and iTunes I suspect).

Google mostly goes to indirect funding via ads and the like - and I for one think that Apple's connected devices and services would never exist if Google did not pave the way for these via services like search, gmail etc...

If we look at the way people spend their time, even on fruit devices, it is mostly via connected services that were created on the Google model - Facebook, twitter, Netflix etc... - People will not pay for these services directly, so the services need to find an alternate funding method - and it is pretty clear that people mostly do not care about it - they are willing and happy to get services for "free" by providing the ads and tracking.

Heck, this forum is ad supported and free.

 

[andalusian]

Thats being proactive. It's better to add more security. Being in a field of software security, you would agree no?

How is it proactive if it happened after the breach? I already told you that I am very glad they added it, but let's get out of the PR spin for a second and call a spade a spade.

 

[magnifier661]

http://news.investors.com/091814-71...e-model.htm?ven=yahoocp&src=aurlled&ven=yahoo

Video: Apple Keeps Police Out Of IOS8 IPhone, IPad

Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL) announced Wednesday night that it will no longer help law enforcement unlock iPhone, iPad and other devices running its new mobile operating system, iOS8. In fact, the tech titan says it can't.

"On devices running iOS 8, your personal data such as photos, messages (including attachments), email, contacts, call history, iTunes content, notes, and reminders is placed under the protection of your passcode," Apple said on its Web site . "Unlike our competitors, Apple cannot bypass your passcode and therefore cannot access this data. So it's not technically feasible for us to respond to government warrants for the extraction of this data from devices in their possession running iOS 8."

The Supreme Court ruled earlier this year that police usually must get a search warrant to access suspects' cellphones. Apple's new encryption makes it impossible to comply.

 

[magnifier661]

How is it proactive if it happened after the breach? I already told you that I am very glad they added it, but let's get out of the PR spin for a second and call a spade a spade.

So you think they designed iOS8 the day after the security breach? Damn they must be hella fast programmers?!?!?! The fact is, apple already had this new feature in the works, even before the event happened.

 

[Minstrel]

"Unlike our competitors, Apple cannot bypass your passcode and therefore cannot access this data. So it's not technically feasible for us to respond to government warrants for the extraction of this data from devices in their possession running iOS 8."

Still being very specific about how they can't extract data from devices--if iCloud was also impossible to extract from, they would absolutely mention that, since that would sound even better.

 

[magnifier661]

Google mostly goes to indirect funding via ads and the like - and I for one think that Apple's connected devices and services would never exist if Google did not pave the way for these via services like search, gmail etc...

And google may have never existed unless apple made way to the "personal computer". Why does that even matter?

 

[magnifier661]

Still being very specific about how they can't extract data from devices--if iCloud was also impossible to extract from, they would absolutely mention that, since that would sound even better.

Because that was in reference to specific inquiries. The article was designed for confiscated devices.

 

[Minstrel]

Because that was in reference to specific inquiries. The article was designed for confiscated devices.

Yes, but as El Prez has shown, Apple can and has given over data from the cloud. The percentage of people that have had their data handed over to law enforcement is tiny, but not zero. So until they specifically say that the cloud is encrypted even from themselves (not just encrypted to the outside world), we should assume they can still access the data if necessary.

 

[andalusian]

And google may have never existed unless apple made way to the "personal computer". Why does that even matter?

It only matters because Danny was ranting about Google reading his stuff. They do, and they do not deny it, and there is no way to put the horses back in the barn, this is what is going to happen more and more. If you like these products - you are going to be subjected to "scanning" for monetary reasons.

 

[magnifier661]

Yes, but as El Prez has shown, Apple can and has given over data from the cloud. The percentage of people that have had their data handed over to law enforcement is tiny, but not zero. So until they specifically say that the cloud is encrypted even from themselves (not just encrypted to the outside world), we should assume they can still access the data if necessary.

It does here

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4865

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Yes, but as El Prez has shown, Apple can and has given over data from the cloud. The percentage of people that have had their data handed over to law enforcement is tiny, but not zero. So until they specifically say that the cloud is encrypted even from themselves (not just encrypted to the outside world), we should assume they can still access the data if necessary.

The number is purposefully confusing as well as it shows how many government requests were fulfilled out of TOTAL users, not total requests. That would have been a more relevant statistic.

 

[andalusian]

So you think they designed iOS8 the day after the security breach? Damn they must be hella fast programmers?!?!?! The fact is, apple already had this new feature in the works, even before the event happened.

Because this is about iCloud, not about ios8. You are confusing 2 different things. 2-way verification will work on ios7 and ios6 devices as well, not limited to ios8. My old iPad 2 still runs ios6 - and the same security enhancements will be enjoyed on it as far as iCloud access is concerned.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

https://gigaom.com/2014/09/18/apples-warrant-canary-disappears-suggesting-new-patriot-act-demands/

When Apple published its first Transparency Report on government activity in late 2013, the document contained an important footnote that stated:

“Apple has never received an order under Section 215 of the USA Patriot Act. We would expect to challenge such an order if served on us.”

Writer and cyber-activist Cory Doctorow at the time recognized that language as a so-called “warrant canary,” which Apple was using to thwart the secrecy imposed by the Patriot Act.

Warrant canaries are a tool used by companies and publishers to signify to their users that, so far, they have not been subject to a given type of law enforcement request such as a secret subpoena. If the canary disappears, then it is likely the situation has changed — and the company has been subject to such request.

Now, Apple’s warrant canary has disappeared. A review of the company’s last two Transparency Reports, covering the second half of 2013 and the first six months of 2014, shows that the “canary” language is no longer there.

The warrant canary’s disappearance is significant because Section 215 of the Patriot Act permits the National Security Agency to demand companies to hand over their business records in secret, and is believed to be the legal foundation of the controversial PRISM program, which forced major tech companies like Google and Yahoo to participate in a data-collection scheme.

 

[magnifier661]

Because this is about iCloud, not about ios8. You are confusing 2 different things. 2-way verification will work on ios7 and ios6 devices as well, not limited to ios8. My old iPad 2 still runs ios6 - and the same security enhancements will be enjoyed on it as far as iCloud access is concerned.

No the security features are advertised with the new iOS8.

And again, this issue happened a couple weeks ago. So you are saying they are able to recode 3 iOS in 2 weeks on the fly? Then Apple is BRILLIANT PROGRAMMERS!

 

[magnifier661]

https://gigaom.com/2014/09/18/apples-warrant-canary-disappears-suggesting-new-patriot-act-demands/

This has already been posted, but by no means, proof that they have received an order. I mean, even in the article you posted, it says "could". As in maybe not as well.

 

[Denny Crane]

They are masters at PR, that's for sure. In this case, they declared it was not a breach and a week later sent a PR message that they toughened their security. PR indeed.

You act like beefing up security is a bad thing.

ICloud wasn't breached. There are not millions of Apple account passwords posted anywhere.

 

[andalusian]

You act like beefing up security is a bad thing.

ICloud wasn't breached. There are not millions of Apple account pSswords posted anywhere.

Stop blaming me for something I did not do, I clearly said I am glad they are beefing up security, what I said is that the claims that Google is less secure than Apple are, so far, not proven by reality.

 

[Denny Crane]

Stop blaming me for something I did not do, I clearly said I am glad they are beefing up security, what I said is that the claims that Google is less secure than Apple are, so far, not proven by reality.

I haven't made any such claim.

 

[Denny Crane]

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4865

Just to be clear:

iCloud secures your data by encrypting it when it is sent over the Internet, storing it in an encrypted format when kept on server (review the table below for detail), and using secure tokens for authentication. This means that your data is protected from unauthorized access both while it is being transmitted to your devices and when it is stored in the cloud. iCloud uses a minimum of 128-bit AES encryption—the same level of security employed by major financial institutions—and never provides encryption keys to any third parties.

 

[magnifier661]

Stop blaming me for something I did not do, I clearly said I am glad they are beefing up security, what I said is that the claims that Google is less secure than Apple are, so far, not proven by reality.

Wait, Google does share your data to their third party partners and apple doesn't. What is more secure? It maybe "safe" in terms of hacking, but hardly more secure. Sorry that makes zero sense at all.

 

[andalusian]

No the security features are advertised with the new iOS8.

And again, this issue happened a couple weeks ago. So you are saying they are able to recode 3 iOS in 2 weeks on the fly? Then Apple is BRILLIANT PROGRAMMERS!

2-way verification is a server feature, not a client feature. I do not care where they advertise it - the implementation is on the server, it had nothing to do with iOS 8.

If I dig my old Lumia 900 with Windows Phone 7.5 - it will work with 2-step verification against Google services, surly you are not telling me that Microsoft implemented this in an antique OS 3 years before Apple did?

Likewise, my iPad 2 with iOS 6 works with 2-step verification against gmail.

This is a server feature. No changes were made in iOS 8 to work with 2-step verification, because as I showed you, it works in iOS 6 against services that implemented it.
'

 

[magnifier661]

2-way verification is a server feature, not a client feature. I do not care where they advertise it - the implementation is on the server, it had nothing to do with iOS 8.

If I dig my old Lumia 900 with Windows Phone 7.5 - it will work with 2-step verification against Google services, surly you are not telling me that Microsoft implemented this in an antique OS 3 years before Apple did?

Likewise, my iPad 2 with iOS 6 works with 2-step verification against gmail.

This is a server feature. No changes were made in iOS 8 to work with 2-step verification, because as I showed you, it works in iOS 6 against services that implemented it.
'

And like I said to the second part, 2 weeks to program this? Sounds like they were already having this in the works before the incident

 

[andalusian]

Wait, Google does share your data to their third party partners and apple doesn't. What is more secure? It maybe "safe" in terms of hacking, but hardly more secure. Sorry that makes zero sense at all.

Actually, Google does not share your personal data with 3rd part partners, they share aggregate non-personal data (and you can be sure that Apple does as well, otherwise they will not be able to sign all the distribution deals they have with media companies).

What Google does with your personal data is match appropriate ads to your taste that are displayed to you - I am not certain how this is a security breach. Another company that does it to a great effect is Amazon, and I personally love this feature - not having to go through generic ads and actually seeing stuff that might be useful to me is a feature. imho, and it is a feature I like. It is no different from Netflix recommendations based on your viewing habits or Pandora's suggestions for radio stations.

 

[magnifier661]

Actually, Google does not share your personal data with 3rd part partners, they share aggregate non-personal data (and you can be sure that Apple does as well, otherwise they will not be able to sign all the distribution deals they have with media companies).

What Google does with your personal data is match appropriate ads to your taste that are displayed to you - I am not certain how this is a security breach. Another company that does it to a great effect is Amazon, and I personally love this feature - not having to go through generic ads and actually seeing stuff that might be useful to me is a feature. imho, and it is a feature I like. It is no different from Netflix recommendations based on your viewing habits or Pandora's suggestions for radio stations.

This is from the Google privacy page

For external processing

We provide personal information to our affiliates or other trusted businesses or persons to process it for us, based on our instructions and in compliance with our Privacy Policy and any other appropriate confidentiality and security measures.

 

[andalusian]

And like I said to the second part, 2 weeks to program this? Sounds like they were already having this in the works before the incident

2 weeks to program this on the server is more than enough time - especially since Apple does not really have a magical server architecture they use that no one else does, even their client OS (OS-X) is based on a Unix kernel - one suspects that they are running Unix based servers mostly - and these systems are mostly open-source with tons of existing code.

I would not be surprised however if they had the code around for a long time, Apple geeks are geeks like everyone else has - and many of them are world class geeks - I do not believe they are idiots.

They probably did not have their security concerns given a proper priority from management before this happens (You will be astounded how often this happens in large scale software products) - probably because of the corporate culture I alluded to before, Google has been dealing with massive scale online services a lot longer than Apple did - where most of Apple's management comes from a style/device/manufacturing background.

Apple is still firstly a device company, and as such - they are going to have more issues with services than companies that came from the other side (See the initial absurd release of Apple Maps). Likewise, you clearly saw that Apple's iOS (the client side) was much more polished from the start compared to Google's earlier Android releases (Android versions 1, 2 and mostly 3 had poor UI and performance, only in version 4 they started to really shine).

I am going back to my original post on this issue, until proven with time, Google had a lot more experience with security on massive scale services that Apple and it has shown so far - it might change in the future, it might become close enough (as Android UI shows, if you continue to work at it, it becomes good and can even overtake the original benchmark in some places).

 

[andalusian]

This is from the Google privacy page

For external processing

We provide personal information to our affiliates or other trusted businesses or persons to process it for us, based on our instructions and in compliance with our Privacy Policy and any other appropriate confidentiality and security measures.

What is something that requires external processing? To me this sounds like payments. Apple must do that as well - otherwise Apple Pay will not work - if you do not pass the personal information of the person making the payment, the processors will not process it.

Any service that requires external processing by Google is likely to require the same by Apple.

I assure you that Google (or Apple) do not need external processing to display ads...


Here is Apple's privacy policies - doing just the same:

Service Providers
Apple shares personal information with companies who provide services such as information processing, extending credit, fulfilling customer orders, delivering products to you, managing and enhancing customer data, providing customer service, assessing your interest in our products and services, and conducting customer research or satisfaction surveys. These companies are obligated to protect your information and may be located wherever Apple operates.

http://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/en-ww/

 

[magnifier661]

What is something that requires external processing? To me this sounds like payments. Apple must do that as well - otherwise Apple Pay will not work - if you do not pass the personal information of the person making the payment, the processors will not process it.

Any service that requires external processing by Google is likely to require the same by Apple.

I assure you that Google (or Apple) do not need external processing to display ads...


Here is Apple's privacy policies - doing just the same:



http://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/en-ww/

So you calling Tim Cook a liar? I mean what he said is highly public. If it weren't true, im sure you'd hear from it by Google quicker than flies on shit.

"We don't 'monetize' the information you store on your iPhone or in iCloud. And we don't read your email or your messages to get information to market to you. Our software and services are designed to make our devices better. Plain and simple," the letter sa

 

[magnifier661]

2 weeks to program this on the server is more than enough time - especially since Apple does not really have a magical server architecture they use that no one else does, even their client OS (OS-X) is based on a Unix kernel - one suspects that they are running Unix based servers mostly - and these systems are mostly open-source with tons of existing code.

I would not be surprised however if they had the code around for a long time, Apple geeks are geeks like everyone else has - and many of them are world class geeks - I do not believe they are idiots.

They probably did not have their security concerns given a proper priority from management before this happens (You will be astounded how often this happens in large scale software products) - probably because of the corporate culture I alluded to before, Google has been dealing with massive scale online services a lot longer than Apple did - where most of Apple's management comes from a style/device/manufacturing background.

Apple is still firstly a device company, and as such - they are going to have more issues with services than companies that came from the other side (See the initial absurd release of Apple Maps). Likewise, you clearly saw that Apple's iOS (the client side) was much more polished from the start compared to Google's earlier Android releases (Android versions 1, 2 and mostly 3 had poor UI and performance, only in version 4 they started to really shine).

I am going back to my original post on this issue, until proven with time, Google had a lot more experience with security on massive scale services that Apple and it has shown so far - it might change in the future, it might become close enough (as Android UI shows, if you continue to work at it, it becomes good and can even overtake the original benchmark in some places).

Ford is the oldest assembly line car manufacturer. According to your logic, they should be the best car manufacturers in the world. Is that true?

 

[andalusian]

So you calling Tim Cook a liar? I mean what he said is highly public. If it weren't true, im sure you'd hear from it by Google quicker than flies on shit.

Me? It is their web site that I quoted. Please point your fingers at Apple's web site for complaints.

You want other Apple related admission that they read your data?

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/201...er-More-Fun-Way-to-Use-iPhone-in-the-Car.html

CarPlay makes driving directions more intuitive by working with Maps to anticipate destinations based on recent trips via contacts, emails or texts, and provides routing instructions, traffic conditions and ETA. You can also simply ask Siri and receive spoken turn-by-turn directions, along with Maps, which will appear on your car’s built-in display

"We don't 'monetize' the information you store on your iPhone or in iCloud. And we don't read your email or your messages to get information to market to you. Our software and services are designed to make our devices better. Plain and simple," the letter sa

Well, maybe Mr. Cook should read what his company writes on it's own web site. He is either telling you things from both sides of his mouth or someone breached Apple's web site - leading us back to question their security credentials.

You complained that Google hands some personal info to external processors and I showed you that Apple does exactly the same.