Apple loves privacy!

[andalusian]

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?

No, as my message clearly states, maybe you should give me the credit and read everything I say:

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).

 

[Denny Crane]

CarPlay is an integration with a car. Not something server based.

Maybe you should read the whole press release.

 

[andalusian]

CarPlay is an integration with a car. Not something server based.

Maybe you should read the whole press release.

"we don't read your email or your messages" - It still reads your messages contacts and texts. It might not do it on the server - I do not know, Apple did not tell us, but clearly they do read it somewhere...

But the specific issue that Mag had with me is with Google sharing info with external processors - which Apple admits to doing as well, so I am not sure why it is a problem when Google does it but not a problem when Apple does it - and I am not sure why it makes me someone who calls Cook a liar when their own web site tells us they share personal information with external processors.

 

[magnifier661]

No, as my message clearly states, maybe you should give me the credit and read everything I say:

Then using the "they've done it longer so they are better" should be discounted right?

 

[magnifier661]

"we don't read your email or your messages" - It still reads your messages contacts and texts. It might not do it on the server - I do not know, Apple did not tell us, but clearly they do read it somewhere...

But the specific issue that Mag had with me is with Google sharing info with external processors - which Apple admits to doing as well, so I am not sure why it is a problem when Google does it but not a problem when Apple does it - and I am not sure why it makes me someone who calls Cook a liar when their own web site tells us they share personal information with external processors.

But this is a semantic argument. Does Google use outside processors for their server platform? The answer is yes.

 

[Denny Crane]

"we don't read your email or your messages" - It still reads your messages contacts and texts. It might not do it on the server - I do not know, Apple did not tell us, but clearly they do read it somewhere...

But the specific issue that Mag had with me is with Google sharing info with external processors - which Apple admits to doing as well, so I am not sure why it is a problem when Google does it but not a problem when Apple does it - and I am not sure why it makes me someone who calls Cook a liar when their own web site tells us they share personal information with external processors.

The software is on your phone or in the car, not on their servers in the cloud.

I think you just go this one wrong.

 

[Denny Crane]

I didn't read Google's terms of service to read that they only hand off data for specific processing. They hand it off to affiliates for any reason. Or to 3rd parties for processing (e.g. payments).

I think the topic is correct. Google publicly says, "If you want to keep something secret, do not share it with us." Apple says, "we don't share with 3rd parties."

Apple does not share your documents, spreadsheets, emails, and so on, that are stored in iCloud. What they might share is your credit card information with visa so they can bill you for the music files you just bought.

EDIT: Google's CEO, Eric Schmidt, declared: "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place. If you really need that kind of privacy, the reality is that search engines—including Google—do retain this information for some time and it's important, for example, that we are all subject in the United States to the Patriot Act and it is possible that all that information could be made available to the authorities."

In its 2007 Consultation Report, Privacy International ranked Google as "Hostile to Privacy", its lowest rating on their report, making Google the only company in the list to receive that ranking.

At the Techonomy conference in 2010, Eric Schmidt predicted that "true transparency and no anonymity" is the way forward for the internet: "In a world of asynchronous threats it is too dangerous for there not to be some way to identify you. We need a [verified] name service for people. Governments will demand it." He also said that "If I look at enough of your messaging and your location, and use artificial intelligence, we can predict where you are going to go. Show us 14 photos of yourself and we can identify who you are. You think you don't have 14 photos of yourself on the internet? You've got Facebook photos!"

 

[Denny Crane]

BTW, I just installed ios8 on my iPhone and iPad. During the installation, it had me request an iCloud keychain key from an existing device. That device being my desktop. Sure looks like it was a peer-to-peer copy of something like a private key.

 

[magnifier661]

I didn't read Google's terms of service to read that they only hand off data for specific processing. They hand it off to affiliates for any reason. Or to 3rd parties for processing (e.g. payments).

I think the topic is correct. Google publicly says, "If you want to keep something secret, do not share it with us." Apple says, "we don't share with 3rd parties."

Apple does not share your documents, spreadsheets, emails, and so on, that are stored in iCloud. What they might share is your credit card information with visa so they can bill you for the music files you just bought.

EDIT: Google's CEO, Eric Schmidt, declared: "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place. If you really need that kind of privacy, the reality is that search engines—including Google—do retain this information for some time and it's important, for example, that we are all subject in the United States to the Patriot Act and it is possible that all that information could be made available to the authorities."

In its 2007 Consultation Report, Privacy International ranked Google as "Hostile to Privacy", its lowest rating on their report, making Google the only company in the list to receive that ranking.

At the Techonomy conference in 2010, Eric Schmidt predicted that "true transparency and no anonymity" is the way forward for the internet: "In a world of asynchronous threats it is too dangerous for there not to be some way to identify you. We need a [verified] name service for people. Governments will demand it." He also said that "If I look at enough of your messaging and your location, and use artificial intelligence, we can predict where you are going to go. Show us 14 photos of yourself and we can identify who you are. You think you don't have 14 photos of yourself on the internet? You've got Facebook photos!"

Got nothing to hide? How about "government doesn't have right to violate my rights"

 

[SlyPokerDog]

If you're a sicko and into kiddy porn you should use Apple because you will never get caught!

 

[magnifier661]

If you're a sicko and into kiddy porn you should use Apple because you will never get caught!

Okay so everybody loses their rights because of a child porn violator?

You sound like a guy wanting to ban guns because of some school shooting

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

If you're a sicko and into kiddy porn you should use Apple because you will never get caught!

Well, as long as you do everything on your phone!

 

[magnifier661]

Well, as long as you do everything on your phone!

Ignoring how they encrypt your cloud again?

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Okay so everybody loses their rights because of a child porn violator?

You sound like a guy wanting to ban guns because of some school shooting

It...was...a...joke...

 

[magnifier661]

It...was...a...joke...

No way?! I thought you were into child porn

 

[SlyPokerDog]

No way?! I thought you were into child porn

Dude.

 

[magnifier661]

Dude.

It. Was. A. Joke!

 

[Denny Crane]

http://www.theverge.com/2014/9/18/6...ption-standard-in-the-next-version-of-android

 

[magnifier661]

http://www.theverge.com/2014/9/18/6...ption-standard-in-the-next-version-of-android

I just saw that article. Didn't someone say that Google is better at privacy than apple? Weird that apple came out first

 

[RR7]

I just saw that article. Didn't someone say that Google is better at privacy than apple? Weird that apple came out first

article says google had it for 3 years, but as an option, not default setting. So apple didn't have it first.

 

[magnifier661]

article says google had it for 3 years, but as an option, not default setting. So apple didn't have it first.

They've had this technology for 3 years, yet it won't be set on all phones until June 2015?! So they could have made every phone private or encrypted, yet we had to go through some hoops to get it? When I looked all throughout their website, none of this was mentioned, yet after apple announced they will not allow police to break into phones, they said "yeah us too! We've had this technology years ago and you guys get it in about a year"

 

[RR7]

They've had this technology for 3 years, yet it won't be set on all phones until June 2015?! So they could have made every phone private or encrypted, yet we had to go through some hoops to get it? When I looked all throughout their website, none of this was mentioned, yet after apple announced they will not allow police to break into phones, they said "yeah us too! We've had this technology years ago and you guys get it in about a year"

no, it says every phone had it, it just wasn't a default setting. No hoop to jump through, just a setting change.

 

[Denny Crane]

no, it says every phone had it, it just wasn't a default setting. No hoop to jump through, just a setting change.

That's how I read it.

But they are following Apple's lead.

Also, there is no specific android version. The damned android market is fragmented by OS version.

Not sure if all those versions support it. It also demonstrates a pretty weak adoption rate for their latest and greatest software - or that the software isn't supported except on the latest and greatest phones. Not only is the market fragmented by version, it's fragmented by manufacturer.

Something close to 90% of Apple users are running the latest version of iOS.

I've created multiple apps for mobile devices and iOS has been a breeze. If the code works on an Apple device, ship it, it's good to go. If it works on one android device, it may not work on any of the others. It's a constant battle to fix bugs caused by the different OS versions on top of bugs introduced by the manufacturers.

FWIW.

 

[magnifier661]

http://www.engadget.com/2014/08/15/..._campaign=Engadget&?ncid=rss_full&cps=gravity

Apps that use your smartphone's microphone need to ask permission, but the motion sensors? No say-so needed. That might not sound like a big deal, but security researchers from Stanford University and defense firm Rafael have discovered a way to turn Android phone gyroscopes into crude microphones. They call their app "Gyrophone" and here's how it works: the tiny gyros in your phone that measure orientation do so using vibrating pressure plates. As it turns out, they can also pick up air vibrations from sounds, and many Android devices can do it in the 80 to 250 hertz range -- exactly the frequency of a human voice.

By contrast, the iPhone's sensor only uses frequencies below 100Hz, and is therefore useless for tapping conversations. Though the researchers' system can only pick up the odd word or the speaker's gender, they said that voice recognition experts could no doubt make it work better. They'll be delivering a paper next week at the Usenix Security conference, but luckily, Google is already up on the research. "This early, academic work should allow us to provide defenses before there is any likelihood of real exploitation."

 

[andalusian]

http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-icloud-problems-before-nude-celebrity-photo-hack-2014-9

This above tell you all you need to know about how much better Google security was than Apple... (and likely still is, but Tim Cook is definitely making all the right noises to ensure that it is no longer ignored at Apple - so hopefully it will not be the case going forward). I will go again to my opinion that this was not a technical issue, it was a management issue - not giving security the proper emphasis it requires.

For those of you running OSX - you are also possibly open to the Bash security hack -

http://www.macrumors.com/2014/09/25/bash-flaw-os-x/
http://mac-how-to.wonderhowto.com/h...lshock-bash-exploit-heres-patch-os-x-0157606/

The 2nd link provides info how to check if your computer is not secure. If you are a Windows user, this is not a concern unless you installed something like the MKS tools - but I suspect that this is something people have stopped doing years and years ago.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

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.

We're about to see what's up.