Hacker News Reader

Comment by keepper | Hacker News Reader

  "here’s a bunch of reasons why this might not work, not least that no-one except Google and Apple want Google and Apple to have that much control over publishing and advertising. "

I've said this previously, if you for a second think Apple is protecting you against evil "Social Media company" or "Evil X Advertiser", you are wrong. Apple is only looking out for Apple. And they want to be the one who controls user data. Plain and simple.

The enemy of your enemy is not necesarily your friend.

Things SHOULD change. Moving the power from one big corp to another big corp is not the answer. No matter how convenient it may seem.

View on HN

"I've said this previously, if you for a second think Apple is protecting you against evil "Social Media company" or "Evil X Advertiser", you are wrong. Apple is only looking out for Apple. "

How are these two sentences at odds with each other? Apple is absolutely "protecting me against evil social media companies" because I give them a lot of money for their products that offer privacy as a feature. They are looking out for Apple by providing a high value, sadly unique service in the industry, and their users obviously appreciate it.

It is possible for there to be aligned interests between a user and a provider. Pointing out that they're doing it for their own reasons (which in this case is their product positioning) isn't the slam dunk you think it is.

I'm not saying it's a slam dunk at all.

I'm saying Apple is ok with exempting themselves. How come their apps are not using the same dialog? Why do they hide behind "location services", when in reality, they are used for similar purposes?

Example, Airtags. https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2021/06/remember-apple-airtags-an...

How can AirTags highjack ANY apple device to report their location, without asking the device owner? Do IOS owners get asked in a dialog about allowing air tag tracking? NOPE

"How come their apps are not using the same dialog?"

Apple isn't sharing your data with other companies / data brokers. They aren't selling your information, or buying your information. It is a silo. They aren't "exempting" themselves, it isn't relevant to them.

For that matter, maybe you haven't noticed but Google apps don't show this warning either. For whatever criticisms I might have about Google's data siphoning, they silo it and aren't data whores like Facebook and companies like that.

Again, this is Apple's business model, and it's one that many of us appreciate and will pay for, and more for. It is sadly a rare quality now.

"How can AirTags highjack ANY apple device to report their location"

Hijack is an odd way to phrase it.

Hijack is the right word.[1]

And again, you may not understand the ad space, as apple is doing what you think they are not doing. [2]

[1]https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2021/05/14/apple-airtags-ha...

[2] https://www.adexchanger.com/mobile/is-apple-giving-its-own-a...

"as apple is doing what you think they are not doing"

You are misunderstanding this entire topic, and neither of your citations remotely support your claims.

Fact: Google apps do not show the tracking permission. Now as homework I want you to go and study why that is, and then figure out how that same scenario might just apply to Apple.

Do you even understand what "third-party" means? Clearly you don't.

Except Apple does a pretty good job of keeping your data on your device. Sure, they’re no saints, but they put a lot of effort into privacy.

Explain AirTags and their ability to highjack the internet connectivity of any apple device. Did you get asked about that?

So why is it ok for apple to do that, and non of their vendors?

Their partners can use the Find My network.

https://www.macworld.com/article/342763/apple-opens-up-its-f...

I'm not sure how that's relevant to your privacy as a user, although obviously the tags and other trackers raise concerns around abuse.

Relevance here[1]

[1]https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2021/05/14/apple-airtags-ha...

You realize that "attack" is possible explicitly because the protocol is private, right?

Apple can't know that it's not a legitimate communication because they don't know who you are, what device is calling for help, and who the device owner is.

And if you want to use my phone to upload a few bytes/second while I'm passing by, as long as the data isn't being stolen from an air gapped system, be my guest.

You feel the same way about Amazon's sidewalk network?

I haven’t paid enough attention to have a strong opinion, but my assumption is Amazon isn’t talking about a couple bytes of anonymous location data, so I don’t see how the two compare.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com