Hacker News Reader

Comment by ec109685 | Hacker News Reader

This no longer works on iOS. Apple locked the ability to enumerate installed apps several years ago. It makes app deep linking more painful but eliminates this privacy nightmare.

Funnily only apple and its ad network now has access to the list of installed apps.

View on HN

It's also getting more and more locked down on Android too.

Not sure if there's other mechanisms, but from 11 onwards, apps have to declare which other apps they will query through PackageManager https://developer.android.com/training/package-visibility/de...

It is a hard problem because there are so many side channels and apps keep swapping over to use those. And then it becomes a policy and review challenge, which is tricky to nail correctly every time.

I think locking down mobile systems is the exact wrong way to go about it. This will make mobile computing even more hostile.

That apps can do that this easily is a result of software deployment through a single channel in the first place.

> Funnily only apple and its ad network now has access to the list of installed apps.

Of course Apple can program in apps that look at your list, but do you have a source for this being used in their (upcoming?) ad network?

Not showing you ads for apps you already own seems like a sensible feature, at least.

They could easily do this on device, but I still see ads for apps I own (including my own apps). Often right above the organic App Store search result for the same app

But they don't. I see ads for installed apps all the time.

> Of course Apple can program in apps that look at your list

Why is that of course? I mean I get that technically they can do that, but should they be allowed to? If apps need to follow some sort of guidelines to be published on the App Store, wouldn't it be unfair if Apple don't have to follow those guidelines?

> Why is that of course? I mean I get that technically they can do that, but should they be allowed to? If apps need to follow some sort of guidelines to be published on the App Store, wouldn't it be unfair if Apple don't have to follow those guidelines?

If you trust Apple to control the underlying software on your iOS device that, for example, is supposed to enforce all the other restrictions, then you are already extending them far more trust than you extend to any other app. It's not clear to me why that trust would end at a notional border between "the OS" and "an app".

An example of an 'app which can look at your list' is Springboard, the iOS internal name for the GUI with home screen and so on. Another example is of course System Preferences.

I don't believe Apple ships any optional apps which have this level of privilege, let alone one which doesn't obviously need to have it. This is possible, but to the best of my knowledge it isn't the case.

I am sure those two things are unrelated and comoletely unintentional.

I'm okay with this. It's nearly impossible to stop every company from collecting your data, but it becomes a hell of a lot easier if you try to consolidate and trust one major company. For me, I try to limit the collection by Facebook and Google by putting more trust in Apple services and features. The alternative to this isn't Apple getting less data from me, it's that same data also going to Google and Facebook.

As an example, if I'm going to buy a "smart assistant", it'll be a Homepod instead of Alexa or Google Home. Not by brand loyalty, but by the nature that Siri may already be capturing all of that anyways so the additional data loss is minimal.

It’s very naive to consolidate trust and security into a single, publicly traded company, that’s obligated to increase shareholders value.

It works till their business is growing well. Guess what happens when it stops, but numbers still have to go up?

Most people are going to do that regardless.

It becomes not a question of whether to trust some for-profit company, but which one.

Many people feel, and I tend to agree, that Apple is a safer bet than Google, because Apple (at least, at the moment) makes its money via hardware and software sales, rather than advertising revenue. They have significant incentives to protect your data and not share it, in a way that an advertising-centric company like Google does not have.

Of course, as Apple gets into the ad business they will erode this advantage, whether actual or just perceived.

In last few years Apple is attempting to do incredibly successful vendor lock in, mostly in the name of privacy, like forcing Sign In with Apple, content sales via their channels, etc. Leaving Apple eco system will only get harder each year.

They’re slowly boiling the frog.

Note - I do use Apple devices, so I’m also a frog.

I would say it is a safer bet but not by much. What info Apple is keeping is pure speculation though and nobody outside of Apple could verify it effectively.

I mean sure, but google has done zero to make me think they care even the slightest about privacy (security != privacy). Apple at least takes some steps. Trust me when they go rogue I will be just as harsh.

why isn't it possible to have 99% of apps be completely silo'd off from others? essentially a walled garden within a walled garden. Sure a few will need to communicate with other apps, but that should be a user permission and not available "just because"

Except that with Siri you’re getting the most stupid assistant.

100% agree, I was just using it as an example. When I had an Alexa, it was much more well-rounded than Siri is. Living with Siri (or without?) is just an inconvenience of the consolidation.

sadly I think apple stock holders demand growth and one way is through forcing the user to listen to 5 ads before the can check their SMS or make a call.

Did you read recent news of Google testing this with YouTube and apply it to Apple?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com