Comment

Comment on Apple watching & logging EVERY APP YOU OPEN [Louis Rossmann]

Unfortunately, this is highly misleading. Thank you for sharing this, and I appreciate good, high quality information about privacy but please don’t spread misleading information about one of the few companies that provides easily accessible private tools for the not-so-tech-savvy, as well as the busy. Apple applies E2E encryption for almost all iCloud data, something similar to Tor for web browsing, kills tracking pixels in your mail, uses differential privacy to avoid identifying you, and so much more.

Please see: blog.jacopo.io/en/post/apple-ocsp/

TL;DR

No, macOS does not send Apple a hash of your apps each time you run them. You should be aware that macOS might transmit some opaque3 information about the developer certificate of the apps you run. This information is sent out in clear text on your network. You shouldn’t probably block ocsp.apple.com with Little Snitch or in your hosts file.

source

Sort:hotnew top

Dnn@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
The video is basically some dude reading a blog post (boy, I hate those, provide no value). The blog post he reads is this: sneak.berlin/20201112/your-computer-isnt-yours/

The author comments to the blog post you linked and it partially makes sense: if you fetch the developer’s certificate, Apple knows when you started an application of that developer (and which public IP address you have).

Whether or not there are many devs that only made one application, so you can identify this, I cannot estimate, I’m not an Apple user. But you don’t need to send a hash calculated in client side to get this info.

source
- octalfudge@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  You’re absolutely right that it’s still an issue to transmit information about the developer certificate. Apple published a response to this, which admittedly is not ideal:
  
  support.apple.com/en-us/HT202491#view:~:text=Priv…
  
  We have never combined data from these checks with information about Apple users or their devices. We do not use data from these checks to learn what individual users are launching or running on their devices.
  
  These security checks have never included the user’s Apple ID or the identity of their device. To further protect privacy, we have stopped logging IP addresses associated with Developer ID certificate checks, and we will ensure that any collected IP addresses are removed from logs.
  
  In addition, over the the next year we will introduce several changes to our security checks:
  
  A new encrypted protocol for Developer ID certificate revocation checks
  
  Strong protections against server failure
  
  A new preference for users to opt out of these security protections
  
  source
  - Shikadi@wirebase.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    I mean that sounds like a pretty good response to me
    
    source
thann@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
what is misleading exactly? the part where every app you open gets sent to apple along with third parties along with your IP?
because I’m pretty sure that’s all 100% true, and I think its been true for over 5 years…

you’re just suggesting that because they do one thing well they do everything well, which is a fallacy.
Also, any proprietary program that does “E2EE” is misleading you by omitting the part where they could totally steal anyones keys at any time with the push of a button, if they haven’t already. it is completely laughable to suggest any proprietary E2EE program is secure!

so who is spreading the missinfo again?

source
- octalfudge@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  I’m sorry but did you read the article l linked to or the TL;DR I lifted from the article?
  
  They do not send the app you open to Apple, and there is no evidence they send it to third parties as the app information is not sent at all!
  
  Nevertheless, they do send information about the developer certificate for notarization and gatekeeper checks.
  
  support.apple.com/en-us/HT202491#view:~:text=Priv…
  
  Quote:
  
  We have never combined data from these checks with information about Apple users or their devices. We do not use data from these checks to learn what individual users are launching or running on their devices.
  
  To further protect privacy, we have stopped logging IP addresses associated with Developer ID certificate checks, and we will ensure that any collected IP addresses are removed from logs.
  
  In addition, over the the next year we will introduce several changes to our security checks: A new encrypted protocol for Developer ID certificate revocation checks Strong protections against server failure A new preference for users to opt out of these security protections
  
  source
  - thann@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    The fact that existed for years is the problem. the fact that execs signed off on this at all means apple is terrible for privacy
    
    I read the article and the only pedantic detail that was wrong in the initial report was that gatekeeper didnt send the “appication hash” it sent the “applications certificate id” which is a worthless distinction and changes nothing. you’re acting like that somehow exonerates apple, and then just blindly believing what their PR person says. youd have to be a complete idiot or working for them to believe that crap.
    
    source
    Shikadi@wirebase.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    So they did one thing wrong and it means they’re terrible for privacy? Welp, guess I can’t have a phone because the alternative (Google) has a business model that depends on being terrible for privacy, and my work apps disallow custom ROMs.
    
    source
- xedrak@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  I’m not going to touch your other points, but you clearly have no idea how encryption works if you claim that any proprietary program using end-to-end encryption is insecure.
  
  source
  - thann@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    if you trust everything a sales person says, I have a bridge to sell you.
    
    there is no reason to believe any proprietary program does what is says, and even if you decompile it and convince yourself its not sending your keys home, they could update it at any moment.
    
    IDK where you get all of this trust from
    
    source
    Shareiff@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    Take your meds lol
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
    xedrak@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    What you’re describing is possible in certain circumstances , but it would expose the companies to an insane amount of liability. Also, open source software can introduce vulnerabilities that could be exploited to do the same exact thing. Open source software is not inherently more secure. Remember that time malware was introduced to the Linux kernel directly as a research project?
    
    source
    steakmeout@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    So in your view because anything could change everything will? How do you cross a road or drive or eat food or well anything at all?
    
    You must be super paranoid and fearful.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
- dohpaz42@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  Misleading as to WHY macOS is phoning home. It’s done to validate that the developer of the app you’re attempting to run is a trusted developer. Disabling or bypassing this check would open users up to potentially malicious software. howtogeek.com/…/does-apple-track-every-mac-app-yo…
  
  source
  - thann@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    youre being misleading by saying why!
    unless you were in the room, your speculation is as good as mine, and Im not saying why, Im just stating facts!
    
    source
lemmyvore@feddit.nl ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

Apple applies E2E encryption for almost all iCloud data with Advanced Data Protection

They only started doing that in December, it has not rolled out to everyone and everything yet, and like you said it won’t cover everything even then — mail, contacts and calendar will not be included. (And they considered backdooring it for a while before they relented.)

Even the E2E aspect is misleading. The encryption ultimately relies on a password, which can be brute-forced because most people don’t use overly complex passwords for their iCloud account. Hardware keys are something Apple has only very recently made possible to use.

theverge.com/…/apple-end-to-end-encryption-icloud…

schneier.com/…/apple-is-finally-encrypting-icloud…

Bottom line, it would be more correct to say that Apple has recently made privacy improvements. But for the longest time they were nowhere near the privacy champion they styled themselves as.

source
- octalfudge@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  Apple’s stated reason for not covering mail, contacts and calendar is “Because of the need to interoperate with the global email, contacts, and calendar systems, iCloud Mail, Contacts, and Calendar aren’t end-to-end encrypted”. I think it’s worth mentioning that critical bit of context. support.apple.com/en-sg/guide/security/…/web. Apple does have to balance usability and security, though this might not be as secure / private as you or I would like.
  
  I think it’s a little misleading to say they considered backdooring it. They intended to scan images for CSAM before uploading it to iCloud Photo Library. A lot of speculation was they wanted to E2EE photos but were worried about the reaction from the FBI and other bodies, given the FBI had pressured them on this before, and so settled on this compromise. If they had managed to do this, they wouldn’t be able to access the photos after they had been uploaded, hence, they had to scan them prior to the uploading.
  
  They attempted to do this with a very complex (and honestly still relatively privacy-preserving) way of comparing perceptual hashes, but perhaps they realised (from the feedback accompanying the backlash) this could easily be abused by authoritarian governments, so they abandoned this idea.
  
  I would assume that a company like Apple is getting significant pressure behind back doors, and they cater to an audience that is unforgiving for any slight reduction in performance or ease-of-use, and wants security features that are almost fully transparent to them. Given these constraints, I’m not sure they can improve much faster than what they’ve demonstrated. Smaller, open-source projects probably don’t have these constraints.
  
  source
Baketime@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

applies something similar to Tor for web browsing

Can you tell me some more about this? I haven't heard about this interested to know what it is

source
- octalfudge@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  Hi! It’s called iCloud Private Relay and it’s detailed here: threadreaderapp.com/…/1402274867366477831.html
  
  source