Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
ploum

According to Apple’s lawyers, "no reasonable user would expect that their actions in Apple’s apps would be private from Apple."

I repeat to make it clear: According to Apple itself, no reasonable Apple user should expect privacy when using the device.

So let’s make it even more clear: if you expect basic privacy using your Apple device, you are "unreasonable" (= a fool).

(originally posted by @mysk )

43 comments
Tuxicoman

@ploum @mysk

This part applies to only the interaction with "Apple apps" for which there is user tracking & backend processing.

Like expecting a "google search" is private from Google ?

Mysk🇨🇦🇩🇪

@tuxicoman @ploum Apple's lawyers' statement was generic and inaccurate. Not all Apple apps are the same. Apple Maps for example doesn't link search queries to a user's profile. Locations visited and remain on-device or synced with other iCloud devices while end-to-end encrypted. Apple can still provide a way to opt out for apps that aren't private from Apple. But they don't, and that contradicts with the slogan "what happens on your iPhone stays on your iPhone"

Mysk🇨🇦🇩🇪

@tuxicoman @ploum We are working on a new video to highlight this. Might be ready next weekend.

ploum

@mysk @tuxicoman : the point here is not what is technically happening right now.

It is philosophical: if no reasonable user should expect privacy, they will invade that privacy. They will use those data against you. They will sell it. It’s Chehkov’s gun: any gun on the wall in the first act will be fired during the third act.

(well, one might argue that they already do. The fact that they do it less visibly and in a more closed way than Google doesn’t make it less bad).

Tuxicoman

@ploum @mysk

Maybe we diverge @ploum from the subject. I don't know.

The day I realized government put 'recording' mode on all I thought ephemeral:
- sms & calls
- smartphone position
- ip connections (hadopi black boxes, internet providers logs)
- identity to take public transport
- car movement (with cameras recording plates on every main road)
-Tomorrow will be face&body movement recording.

I think we lost. Except hackers than can communicate secrets at exponential costs.

@ploum @mysk

Maybe we diverge @ploum from the subject. I don't know.

The day I realized government put 'recording' mode on all I thought ephemeral:
- sms & calls
- smartphone position
- ip connections (hadopi black boxes, internet providers logs)
- identity to take public transport
- car movement (with cameras recording plates on every main road)
-Tomorrow will be face&body movement recording.

💡𝚂𝗆𝖺𝗋𝗍𝗆𝖺𝗇 𝙰𝗉𝗉𝗌📱

@tuxicoman @ploum @mysk
I expect the password I use on a website to be private from the staff of the website, and if it's a properly-run website it is. Data can be processed without the staff being able to see it. The difference is between companies who choose to do that and those who choose not to. Apple is saying here "we're in the latter category".

𝕃𝕦𝕔𝕒𝕤

@ploum @mysk Is this specifically iOS as a whole or only Apps that Apple made (eg, Maps, Music, Mail, etc?). From their verbiage it just states apps.

Of course, I don't trust the OS either. One time an Apple engineer was able to remote view everything on my screen. Sure, I had to approve it from a prompt.

But, who's to say they don't have a backdoored option to bypass any auth to do so. Crazy.

LPS

@ploum
Is this their take on Zuckerberg's..." Those dumb fucks..."?;)
@mysk @JRepin

Mysk🇨🇦🇩🇪

@lps @ploum @JRepin This is a class action lawsuit Apple is facing based on some research we did like 2 years ago. After publishing a few tweets about how the App Store harvests detailed identifiable usage data and there's no way to turn that off, 21 class action lawsuits were filed against Apple across the US. Now they were combined in one class action lawsuit and the excerpt you see above is taken from Apple's first (so far the only one) response in the case.

gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-priva

@lps @ploum @JRepin This is a class action lawsuit Apple is facing based on some research we did like 2 years ago. After publishing a few tweets about how the App Store harvests detailed identifiable usage data and there's no way to turn that off, 21 class action lawsuits were filed against Apple across the US. Now they were combined in one class action lawsuit and the excerpt you see above is taken from Apple's first (so far the only one) response in the case.

Stu

@ploum @mysk "what happens on your iPhone, stays on your iPhone"

soft cuddly phoenix, disaster queer :v_bi::v_poly:

@ploum@mamot.fr @mysk@mastodon.social when using their apps*. That's a subtle but still meaningful difference, and I'm curious what the argument actually would look like for the platform as a whole. The non-highlighted bit about how with electronic messages, unlike phone calls, you have zero reasonable expectation of privacy by default is far more interesting to me tbh, looking at this...

halva is

@ploum could i get the actual context behind this? the case quoted for this is about the privacy of conversations with customer service agents, which seems to be a pretty random thing to quote for such a general statement

DELETED

@ploum @mysk but also, fuck you, no way you're fixing your iPhone, that would make it less secure and private. thanks Tim Apple.

Hyperhidrosis :verified:
@ploum @mysk Apple literally deletes Apps from your phone that they don't like idk how much clearer it can be.
TheFwGuy 🇪🇺🇮🇹🇺🇸🖖

@ploum @mysk At least Apple openly say so.
Do you really think all the others are different ?
Yeah, they DON'T tell !

the Amygdalai Lama

@ploum @mysk
so there aren't rights anymore, just expectations? So if people know you're an evil c$%t you're allowed to do anything?

Gracjan Nowak

@ploum @mysk I wouldn't read too much into this. Lawyers will say a lot of things just to win the case and these things don't always need to align with what the rest of the company thinks.

wb x64

@gracjan @ploum @mysk it doesn't really matter what an engineer at Apple thinks if judges allow a privacy-eroding argument to win

Wizard Bear (💉x6 + 😷)

@ploum @mysk Apple's control philosophy, let alone privacy issues, is one reason I have zero Apple devices, nor run any Apple software on any device I own.

www.bloodoutofstone.com

@ploum @mysk it is a sad reality of the digital landscape in general.

David J. Atkinson #🟦

@mysk @ploum if you are within shouting distance of nearly any electronic device, you should have no expectation of privacy. The genie is not going back in the bottle.

Asariel

@ploum @mysk Then I won't buy Apple. There's a lot of legal and medical billing procedures that need privacy (HIPPA law).

Brandon

@ploum relevant, concerning poll with a sample that's biased in favor of the tech-savvy: mastodon.blaede.family/@cassid

nutsling

@ploum so no mobile device or platform is even remotely private? i mean, we all already knew all of this

Lumpenpro

@ploum @mysk
Let me get this straight, you highlight a sentence, then quote a phrase of it which diametrically changes the understanding of that sentence.
Profit??

Firecat

@ploum @mysk so they are claiming that their advertising was misleading and broke many television laws which prohibited them from selling fake products.

TrumpGPT

@ploum @mysk Apple, the so-called "innovator," basically calling their users fools if they expect privacy! This is the kind of arrogance you'd expect from Sloppy Steve, not a company that claims to be the best. They're saying, "Oh, you thought your information was private? Ha! Only a bonehead would think that!" This is why we need real leadership and transparency, not these tech giants treating us like we're not smart. We deserve better, folks. We deserve the finest in privacy and respect! #MAGA

Frank

@ploum "Apple’s Privacy Policy describes how Apple collects, uses, and shares your personal data." Do you honestly think that their services could operate without collecting, using, and sharing personal data?

Rudie V. :bhjflag_bisexual: 🌹

@ploum@mamot.fr @mysk@mastodon.social and yet my alternative choice is...Android, owned and operated by Google, which one might say is even worse than Apple on the issue of privacy. And yet regulators see no problem with this duopoly. 🤦‍♂️

David

@ploum @mysk In other words: if you don’t have time or money to acquire or hire the expertise to set up a surveillance-free phone, with a full suite of self-hosted E2E encrypted cloud services, so your only options are Google’s (“Alphabet’s”) panopticon or Apple’s panopticon, then you choose to be surveilled.

By that same pattern of reasoning, when a friend of mine was a middle school girl, and someone spiked her drink, and the local underinvestment in public transit left her only the options of getting a ride from one of two leering and crude men who took “no” as a challenge, she “chose” to accept the marginally less creepy man’s touching. Bullshit!

Nothing is a choice unless you have a real option to refuse without collateral consequences, and nothing is consensual unless you have a real choice. The EULA saying “this is going to happen; accept it” doesn’t change that any more than the “female body inspector” t-shirt gives its wearer consent because the passenger was more scared with of the guy hiding improvised constraints in his cargo pockets.

Apple’s argument is invalid unless and until a single parent RN (for example) has the necessarily turn-key option of a full-featured phone with all the accompanying services and none of the surveillance.

There’s no such thing as consent absent the right to refuse. And rights, by definition, are inalienable. They are not removable through an imposed “choice” of either an abusive EULA or an even worse one, like a guerrilla offering a “choice” of which limb to lose.

@ploum @mysk In other words: if you don’t have time or money to acquire or hire the expertise to set up a surveillance-free phone, with a full suite of self-hosted E2E encrypted cloud services, so your only options are Google’s (“Alphabet’s”) panopticon or Apple’s panopticon, then you choose to be surveilled.

Brewster Kahle

@ploum @mysk

you seem to be equating "apple's apps" = "Apple Device".

Is that backed up in that filing? (honest question, I have not looked further than your post).

I wonder because if I were using the apple maps app, I would assume they would get the addresses I searched for. If I am using find-my app with location services turned on, I would think apple would know my location.

Are they saying that beyond those things that are required for the apps to work?

Ilgaz

@ploum @mysk The other alternative is Google. A complete duopoly nightmare. They are public companies which are required to use whatever they can to make profit.
We should blame governments and organisations like EU, non profits for not supporting free, open source alternatives like postmarket, KDE and even NetBSD. The community are doing everything and there is amazing progress but still not enough. I notice the EU still use Twitter for exclusive updates so I don't hope much.

Jigme Datse

@ploum @mysk Well, I think that you *are* a fool, if you expect privacy in your Apple device. But, "reasonable person" isn't defined the same way that I do in terms of a legal definition. "reasonable person," tends to me roughly "typical person." To me, "reasonable person," is someone who has a more than passable understanding of basic logical concepts.

Ie. making a statement that self proves itself (ie. shows itself to be false) is not reasonable. It is typical.

Go Up