[HN Gopher] Apple making some employees wear body cams in respon...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Apple making some employees wear body cams in response to leaks
        
       Author : freedomben
       Score  : 155 points
       Date   : 2021-06-28 19:37 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.frontpagetech.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.frontpagetech.com)
        
       | underseacables wrote:
       | Ah The Circle, I see
        
       | henvic wrote:
       | Coming up next: body cams leak footage of upcoming Apple product.
       | 
       | No, I don't think so...
        
       | Steko wrote:
       | Apple should make a (non-glasses at first) body cam wearable that
       | is used for life streaming and personal security.
        
       | heavyset_go wrote:
       | Consistent with Apple's implementation of other surveillance
       | measures[1], this is clearly for the benefit and security of
       | users and employees who don't know any better.
       | 
       | [1] https://www.sentinelone.com/blog/what-happened-to-my-mac-
       | app...
        
       | incrudible wrote:
       | The writing on this website makes me believe the transition
       | depicted in the film Idiocracy is well underway.
        
       | spoonjim wrote:
       | What's really funny is that this escalating response from Apple
       | in response to leaks comes directly as the relevance of Apple
       | leaks has gone down. Nobody gives a fuck what the next iPhone is
       | going to look like. Apple events are no longer these mystical
       | ripples in spacetime because 1) Steve Jobs is dead and 2) Apple
       | is not cool anymore 3) everyone knows the next iPhone will be a
       | rounded rectangle with a screen on one side. Apple thinks that
       | they will reclaim their cool by controlling leaks but nobody is
       | going to get excited about Tim Cook pulling the next iPhone out
       | of his pocket. Apple's engineering is still great, but they are
       | no longer an entertainment event.
        
         | snowwrestler wrote:
         | People publish Apple leaks for one reason: they attract an
         | audience. As an example, I give this post which is currently
         | sitting at #1 on HN.
        
         | ketamine__ wrote:
         | If they release a car it will start again...
        
         | paulpauper wrote:
         | new iphone: bigger screen and more camera lenses
         | 
         | Apple doesn't need to be cool anymore. they just need to keep
         | selling a crapload of phones every year and app store
         | downloads, which they seem to have no problem doing. Neither
         | Google nor Microsoft are cool yet are still hugely successful
         | with surging share prices.
        
           | spoonjim wrote:
           | Yes, a major reason Apple is not cool anymore is that they
           | are so successful. It is really very rare for the top vendor
           | to be the cool one, because "cool" almost definitionally
           | means something that not everyone is. Apple did it for awhile
           | though.
        
         | pmoriarty wrote:
         | It completely boggles my mind that anyone _ever_ cared what the
         | next iPhone will be like.
        
           | spoonjim wrote:
           | Steve Jobs had star power to match anyone -- Barack Obama,
           | Bob Dylan, whatever comparison you want to make.
           | 
           | It was a unique condition that one person was both the
           | greatest tech marketer and greatest tech product manager of
           | all time.
        
             | tablespoon wrote:
             | > It was a unique condition that one person was both the
             | greatest tech marketer and greatest tech product manager of
             | all time.
             | 
             | Also one of the greatest assholes of all time. You can't do
             | him justice if you leave that achievement out.
        
           | zsmi wrote:
           | I don't think it takes too much imagination to understand why
           | iPhone case manufactures would be interested in what the next
           | iPhone will be like.
        
             | speedgoose wrote:
             | They usually do have the shape of the phone before the
             | release. That's how you know that the next iPhone will have
             | the shape of a smartphone.
        
               | paulpauper wrote:
               | yeah it's not going to be triangle shaped
        
               | sosborn wrote:
               | https://theoffice.fandom.com/wiki/Pyramid
        
             | paxys wrote:
             | The usual kinds of leaks do not help case manufacturers.
             | You need very detailed schematics or the device itself to
             | be able to make accessories for it. A blurry photo
             | definitely won't do.
        
           | ibero wrote:
           | there is easily a billion dollar plus market of accessories
           | that resolves entirely on knowing what the next iPhone will
           | be like.
        
             | paulpauper wrote:
             | Things like the location of the ports and the size of the
             | camera
        
           | alasdair_ wrote:
           | >It completely boggles my mind that anyone ever cared what
           | the next iPhone will be like.
           | 
           | I mean, people had freaking launch parties for Windows 95.
           | 
           | Now I'm actively trying to work out ways not to install
           | windows 11.
        
             | andrekandre wrote:
             | even windows 7 also had "launch parties"...
             | 
             | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cX4t5-YpHQ
        
             | throwaway492338 wrote:
             | Turn off TPM in your BIOS
        
               | Dah00n wrote:
               | The cut-off is 8th gen intel or 2nd gen Ryzen. TPM or
               | not.
        
               | judge2020 wrote:
               | It does sound like TPM is required to be enabled even for
               | these processors: https://www.microsoft.com/en-
               | us/windows/windows-11-specifica...
        
           | RicoElectrico wrote:
           | Back in the old days, every non-S iPhone blew people's minds,
           | because it made the old generation look like shit in
           | comparison ;)
           | 
           | I think iPhone 4 had the greatest differential impact, on its
           | release the IPS Retina was something unreal.
        
             | rwc wrote:
             | Ironically enough the iPhone 4 was also the first iPhone to
             | leak prior to launch.
        
           | afavour wrote:
           | It's a premium device that people like to show off. Hardly
           | rare in that regard, there are leaks of new cars, watches,
           | etc
        
         | CydeWeys wrote:
         | I don't think it's the iPhone they're primarily worrying about,
         | it's their first foray into a new field. So that could be the
         | first Apple automobile or the first Apple AR/VR device. _That_
         | might matter a lot if it gets leaked way ahead of time.
        
           | Animats wrote:
           | _Relevance of Apple leaks has gone down. Nobody gives a fuck
           | what the next iPhone is going to look like._
           | 
           | Right. What number are they on now, anyway?
        
         | nojito wrote:
         | This is because they have largely been successful in stamping
         | down leaks for a while now
         | 
         | The only leaks they have yet to stop is the hardware related
         | ones.
         | 
         | Great example was during WWDC almost no software changes were
         | leaked before hand.
        
           | mnd999 wrote:
           | Stating the obvious, but their software is (mostly) made in
           | house; the hardware is outsourced to 3rd parties. I suspect
           | the 3rd parties are the problem.
        
       | nefasti wrote:
       | That's some cyberpunk level monitoring
        
         | Hamuko wrote:
         | Missing the brain implant.
        
           | smoldesu wrote:
           | Only a matter of time until they start getting Johnny
           | Mnemonic'd out there.
        
       | avalys wrote:
       | This article is probably bullshit. I mean, it might be true that
       | Apple is requiring some employees to wear a body camera in some
       | circumstances, but none of the evidence cited even indicates that
       | this is directly in response to leaks.
       | 
       | It doesn't even make much sense. Unless they're hoping to catch
       | body camera evidence of an employee using a phone to snap a
       | picture of a prototype, what sort of leak would this possibly
       | prevent? And really, would it be that hard to "accidentally"
       | obscure the body camera for the 5 seconds it takes to snap such a
       | photo anyway?
       | 
       | It certainly won't stop you from calling, texting, or meeting a
       | journalist in your free time to leak whatever information you
       | want.
       | 
       | There's probably much less to the story than this sensationalist
       | headline suggests.
        
         | babypuncher wrote:
         | I've never heard of this website before, but perusing some of
         | their other articles does not inspire much confidence in the
         | quality of their journalism.
        
           | manigandham wrote:
           | Frontpagetech.com was created by Jon Prosser, one of the
           | well-known Apple leakers: https://twitter.com/jon_prosser
        
         | Black101 wrote:
         | > And really, would it be that hard to "accidentally" obscure
         | the body camera for the 5 seconds it takes to snap such a photo
         | anyway?
         | 
         | Maybe the camera is a decoy and really, they just want to know
         | who is around the computer at the time of the leak
         | (location/gps/wifi/etc).
        
         | dave_aiello wrote:
         | I'm surprised that the article isn't dated April 1.
        
         | eldelshell wrote:
         | It's stupid. Let's stop leaks by creating another, centralized
         | leak source... Leaks now in 4K!
        
         | trhway wrote:
         | >an employee using a phone to snap a picture of a prototype
         | 
         | it may as well be in the areas of "no portable electronic
         | devices".
         | 
         | About rationality of the Apple's security - we're talking about
         | people caught bribing Santa Clara sheriff ...
        
           | ballenf wrote:
           | I thought it was pretty well established that the Santa Clara
           | story was one of a rogue sheriff shaking down Apple for some
           | free iPads. In return apple would get their security staff
           | approvals greenlit.
        
             | trhway wrote:
             | exactly. Head of security at a transnational not being able
             | to deal with a rogue sheriff in a very law abiding
             | country/state/county and getting caught with pants down
             | instead - it is hard to be more inept than that.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | herbst wrote:
       | Whatever the reason is that they make them wear bodycams. I mean
       | you can't even make this shit up.
        
       | crazygringo wrote:
       | First of all... if this story comes from a leak, how do we even
       | know it's real? _Tons_ if not most of Apple  "leaks" turn out to
       | be false. Also, how do we know this is in order to prevent leaks,
       | as opposed to other security concerns (like accessing PII).
       | 
       | Second, even if true, it's impossible to judge this without
       | knowing who "some" employees are. I would expect that highly paid
       | Apple engineers aren't all going to be wearing them all day at
       | the office -- that would make hiring a bit difficult...
       | 
       | But if there are certain restricted-access design rooms that they
       | require you to wear one while inside? Or a policy for third-party
       | contractors where Apple doesn't have control over the premises
       | and can't install security cameras? I dunno, but I can imagine a
       | few scenarios where this might not be obviously unreasonable.
        
       | jmull wrote:
       | How would body cameras prevent leaks? (More than, say, any other
       | kind of camera?)
       | 
       | You could try to have potential leaker's wear them and have them
       | on 24/7 for a period of time... and they could simply
       | text/write/message/email outside the view of the camera and the
       | capability of the mic. Not to mention they are going to need to
       | let people use the facilities or have other personal moments with
       | the camera off, so the purpose is defeated.
       | 
       | A guard could wear one and it would help with surveillance but it
       | doesn't need to be a body cam, just a regular surveillance
       | camera.
       | 
       | It seems a lot more useful in the normal sense, where, e.g.,
       | campus guards would be required to wear and use them so that when
       | there are disputes about what happened in a particular incident,
       | the footage can clarify.
        
       | balozi wrote:
       | Maybe all employees should wear police-grade body cams,
       | especially public employees. Come think of it kids and teachers
       | in school should wear body cams too. Maybe all citizens should
       | get their own body cams as well.
        
       | barnaclejive wrote:
       | I'm surprised there are so many comments on this obvious click
       | bait.
       | 
       | > EXCLUSIVE:
       | 
       | > Welp. You read the title. You heard it here first. For the
       | first time ever reported
       | 
       | > Timmy Cook's desk
        
       | LatteLazy wrote:
       | The cynic in me assumed "police grade" means no camera or mic, no
       | memory and no battery...
        
         | heavyset_go wrote:
         | Can be turned on or off at the wearer's convenience, has a
         | delete button, etc.
        
       | fridif wrote:
       | "POLICE GRADE" aka literally just Go Pros...
       | 
       | Will we have to fight for a law that says we will not be
       | retaliated against if we don't want to wear body cams at work?
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | jnwatson wrote:
         | "Police grade" body cams imply the system to dock, charge,
         | store video, and allow indexing and searching.
        
         | jdavis703 wrote:
         | Would such a law exempt LEOs? Or are we saying that having
         | video documentation of _any_ worker is not worth the privacy
         | loss?
        
           | fridif wrote:
           | Would be an interesting thing for sure. Laws are always so
           | messy and full of carve outs and loopholes. Apple would
           | probably start classifying their techs as LEOs to still force
           | them to wear it ;)
        
       | harblfarbl wrote:
       | Now all Apple needs is to actually be making products that are a
       | surprise to anyone, anymore.
        
         | newsbinator wrote:
         | I partly suspect they're going to extremes now because they're
         | preparing to release products that are a surprise.
         | 
         | https://www.macworld.co.uk/news/apple-lawyers-leakers-380606...
        
           | anothernewdude wrote:
           | I'd be surprised if they launched a product that indicated
           | they cared about customers. Like something repairable, or
           | that had a headphone jack.
        
       | johnklos wrote:
       | What a stupid title. "Police grade"? Police turn off their
       | cameras whenever they want, like right before they're about to do
       | illegal shit.
        
       | xvector wrote:
       | It would be hilarious if a vulnerability caused footage from the
       | body cams to leak.
        
         | ectopod wrote:
         | The health secretary in the UK has just resigned after footage
         | was leaked of him kissing his lover in his office. Remarkably,
         | this government minister didn't know he was being spied on in
         | his own office by facilities management. So, yes, surveillance
         | can spectacularly backfire.
        
         | CalChris wrote:
         | Or to be used against Apple in court.
        
       | kitsune_ wrote:
       | The 1984 ad feels a bit ironic in this context.
        
         | gameswithgo wrote:
         | apple has been consistently ironic about that for decades.
         | deciding what software you can install on your own computer,
         | not letting you repair it, paying for exclusive access to
         | hardware locking out competition (screens, 5nm)
        
         | fanatic2pope wrote:
         | Or Tim Cook's proclamation that privacy is a human right.
         | Awkward!
        
         | paxys wrote:
         | That ship sailed when they decided we had to stay within their
         | walled garden for our own safety.
        
       | tablespoon wrote:
       | Bring back the necktie.
        
       | oh_sigh wrote:
       | Absolutely zero in the article shows that these bodycams are to
       | prevent leaks. Where is the author getting this from?
        
         | smoldesu wrote:
         | What do you think they're intended for? Preventing the workers
         | from slacking off?
        
       | You-Are-Right wrote:
       | This is fascism. Apple Logo = Hakenkreuz.
        
       | paxys wrote:
       | If they are making campus security guards wear body cameras then
       | it is somewhat understandable. Anyone else..just no.
       | 
       | Also, don't all their leaks happen from their Chinese suppliers
       | anyways?
        
       | askafriend wrote:
       | More accurate, less sensationalized title: "Apple requiring a
       | select few employees to wear body cameras in order to protect
       | hardware trade secrets".
        
         | pksebben wrote:
         | That sounds more spinny than the original - phrases like
         | "select few" and "hardware trade secrets" seem to add valuation
         | to an otherwise fairly factual title.
         | 
         | Note, when I read this, the current title was: "Apple making
         | some employees wear body cams in response to leaks"
        
           | askafriend wrote:
           | The original article title is: "Apple Making Employees Wear
           | Police-Grade Body Cams in Response to Leaks"
           | 
           | In reality:
           | 
           | * It's a few groups who handle hardware, it's not like the
           | entire engineering team is forced to walk around with body
           | cameras or face execution.
           | 
           | * "Police Grade" means nothing - it's an alarming phrased
           | used for no reason.
           | 
           | * "In response to leaks" while fine, makes light of the
           | situation - in reality its concerning hardware designs of one
           | of the most complex hardware operation in the world.
        
             | pksebben wrote:
             | totally fair. "Police Grade" in this context is ragebait,
             | pure and simple.
        
               | dane-pgp wrote:
               | "Police Grade" _should_ mean that it 's designed to
               | withstand situations where the wearer is interacting with
               | physically abusive and/or vomiting people, but if that's
               | part of Apple's design requirements then perhaps there
               | are bigger problems than just the cameras.
        
               | xnyan wrote:
               | I've evaluated Axon body cameras for compliance to
               | various standards and and the police grade is less vomit
               | resistance (they are in fact durable cameras, but there
               | are many consumer brands that offer similar durability)
               | and more provable digital chain of custody for when you
               | are going to use the resulting video in court. Also, very
               | simple start/stop operation and extremely clear
               | indication that it's on/off.
        
         | spoonjim wrote:
         | This is absolutely as weird as the original title. These are
         | CIA style measures.
        
           | least wrote:
           | The Intelligence community wouldn't ever rely on something
           | like strapping body cameras on to people to ensure they're
           | not leaking information. There's a lot of processes involved
           | to prevent untrustworthy people from ever entering inside a
           | SCIF like your clearance (which is a long and expensive
           | process), then specific onboarding for the sensitive area
           | you're going to be entering, then restricted access to
           | information pertinent to whatever your shop's mission is and
           | also just simply restricting access to sensitive information
           | to the confines of the SCIF. No cell phones. No thumb drives.
           | No laptops. Extremely restricted means of moving sensitive
           | data between locations.
           | 
           | If Apple has information they consider to be highly
           | sensitive, they actually should take "CIA style measures" and
           | not this nonsense.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | askafriend wrote:
           | Do you think Coca Cola protects their formula with anything
           | less?
           | 
           | We're talking about Apple - a 2 trillion dollar operation
           | that operates in hundreds of countries.
        
             | spockz wrote:
             | While we are on this. How _does_ Coca Cola protect their
             | recipe? The products is "brewed" all over the world in many
             | facilities. How do you keep that a secret when there are
             | machines to configure and all this ingredient deliveries?
        
               | jaywalk wrote:
               | Compartmentalization. Company A produces mix containing
               | ingredients 1, 3 and 5. Company B produces mix containing
               | ingredients 2, 4 and 6. Only a handful of people at Coca-
               | Cola even know the details of what companies A and B
               | produce, and everyone below just knows "we combine the
               | two mixes we receive"
        
               | vel0city wrote:
               | Also, good lawyers + good contracts. Its way more
               | profitable for those companies to be quiet about what
               | their mix is than risk the wrath of a $233B beverage
               | company.
        
             | ipaddr wrote:
             | The formula keeps changing over time. Pre 1906 it had
             | cocaine in it.
             | 
             | Here is the recipe.
             | 
             | Extract of coca leaves, caffeine, plenty of sugar (it
             | specifies 30 unidentified units thought to be pounds), lime
             | juice, vanilla and caramel make a syrup.
             | 
             | Into that syrup, the all-important 7x flavourings are
             | added: alcohol and six oils - orange, lemon, nutmeg,
             | coriander, neroli and cinnamon
             | 
             | Knowing this won't help you beat coke. It might have 100
             | years ago but how coke tastes isn't as important as the
             | leases they hold in key retail spaces.
        
           | bredren wrote:
           | I don't think so.
           | 
           | At some Intel Jones Farm lab entrances where chip design was
           | taking place back in 1997, there was buzz-in, camera over
           | entrance door and badge check.
           | 
           | That was on top of entry and exit bag search and badge check.
           | 
           | Tech is more mobile and the stakes are much higher at Apple
           | due to the speed of information transfer and action.
           | 
           | So, nothing to see here.
           | 
           | This site is just mad Apple is clamping down on their sources
           | to create content and build advertising around.
        
       | gbolcer wrote:
       | I saw this movie. The Circle.
        
       | alfalfasprout wrote:
       | Honestly this obsession with minimizing leaks is pretty stupid.
       | At this point, nobody is that wowed by new apple launches
       | anyways.
        
         | sosborn wrote:
         | The concern about leaks isn't about the general population
         | knowing what's in the works. It's about the competition.
        
           | netr0ute wrote:
           | Hot Take: There should be no secrecy at all (FOSH) and
           | instead let companies create real competition.
        
       | tenfourwookie wrote:
       | Apple has become 1984. Big Brother has arrived. Apple has
       | forgotten which side it was on when it made that commercial.
        
         | systemvoltage wrote:
         | I have some bad news. All corporations are authoritarian.
        
           | Angostura wrote:
           | If me and my mate incorporate, does someone come along and
           | implant an authoritarisation chip in me or something.
        
             | Dah00n wrote:
             | Yes, you sign up for a chip implant on page 5.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | antattack wrote:
       | Looking forward to Apple leaks filmed using body cams.
        
       | ping_pong wrote:
       | The funny thing is that someone could openly start wearing a
       | bodycam for themselves and record everything for leaks, and no
       | one would know that it wasn't authorized.
        
       | efficax wrote:
       | it would be amusing to me if this is not in fact true but was a
       | plan given to a specific employee suspected of being a leaker,
       | waiting for him to leak it as proof.
        
         | genericone wrote:
         | Wouldn't be the most secretive thing apple has done. I think
         | some internal groups are given red herring designs with the
         | actual key material embedded into it, but depending on which
         | red herrings go out they knew where the leaks came from.
         | 
         | And following from that, they know who gets to be fired.
        
       | jsnell wrote:
       | Isn't this obviously a joke? Just how would body cams help with
       | leaks?
       | 
       | The concept of police body cams is that there's a discrete event
       | at a specific time that they want to investigate, for example an
       | arrest. You cannot do that with leaks. If the iPhone Next leaks,
       | just what are they going to do? Scan through every minute of body
       | cam footage over months? And look for what?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-06-28 23:02 UTC)