[HN Gopher] Apple sends DSID with iPhone analytics data, tests show
___________________________________________________________________
Apple sends DSID with iPhone analytics data, tests show
Author : kelthuzad
Score : 231 points
Date : 2022-11-21 18:21 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (gizmodo.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (gizmodo.com)
| judge2020 wrote:
| The actual claims via Twitter:
| https://twitter.com/mysk_co/status/1594515229915979776
|
| I wonder what log they got this from; i'm scrubbing through both
| my latest `Analytics-X.ips.ca.synced` files and `AppStore-X.ips`
| file and can't find dsId. This is even with every 'Share
| Analytics' checkbox ticked in settings, besides Improve Health
| Records. Unfortunately the name of that log file is cropped out.
| diebeforei485 wrote:
| They might be in an experiment that most people are not in.
| antipaul wrote:
| Yea, wasn't this experiment ran on jailbroken devices?
| askafriend wrote:
| Isn't it odd that no one else has been able to replicate this
| researcher's findings? I'd imagine a bunch of others would run
| similar tests and come out in support of these findings.
|
| I highly suspect there's something off about this and I will
| wait for others to corroborate these findings (should be easy
| if there's actually substance here).
| [deleted]
| xrayarx wrote:
| It is right in the article: the phones are jailbroken and so
| the encrypted connections can be broken.
|
| The function he is talking about is undocumented, encrypted,
| can't be turned off and uses different servers.
|
| The whole thing might be illegal too, at least in the EU
| judge2020 wrote:
| If this telemetry file they're showing is undocumented and
| Apple is intentionally hiding this analytics upload from
| Settings -> Privacy & Security -> Analytics & Improvements
| -> Analytics Data (which allows you to export the json
| files it uploads), then I feel like that'd be a much bigger
| story and would at least be mentioned here.
| derefr wrote:
| I've always been suspicious that there's extra, "latent"
| first-party instrumentation code in consumer OSes that, when
| activated, does some additional "innocuous-seeming" metrics-
| collection, along existing metrics-collection channels, but
| that is actually just barely enough to be identifiable (in a
| way that's only apparent if you're a security researcher and
| you think really hard about it); where this switch is either
| activated per-device during system updates or virus hot-scan
| pushes, or per user for cloud-connected user accounts by
| monitoring a policy flag on your cloud account; and where
| these mechanisms in turn are activated by state actors
| telling the OS manufacturer to do so, to then collect the
| resulting metrics and de-anonymize the device owner.
|
| I mean, it's what I'd do if I were Apple and/or Microsoft,
| and I knew that the US government was constantly compelling
| my employees through National Security Letters to do a bunch
| of extra off-the-books work to enable transparent one-off
| device-specific wiretaps. I'd productize that wiretap
| process, to get my employees' time back.
| bilboa wrote:
| It seems too early to say "no one else is able to replicate
| it", given that the claim was only posted to Twitter
| yesterday, and the Gizmodo article linked to here was only
| posted 4 hours ago.
| askafriend wrote:
| It's been a couple weeks. Gizmodo's article says 4hrs ago
| because they're just spamming it and making it seem like
| new content (another red flag IMO)
|
| Here's a Gizmodo article from 2 weeks ago talking about the
| same exact researcher: https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-
| analytics-tracking-even-whe...
| godelski wrote:
| I'm honestly surprised we aren't seeing these big tech companies
| have an arms race with respect to homomorphic encryption. Since
| you can perform computations on the encrypted data itself this
| appears to be the best of both worlds: anonymous and still able
| to pull big data. Probably won't be able to serve as personalized
| ads, but from what I'm aware, the big data is far more important
| than the direct targeting.
|
| I know Meta is betting big on the Metaverse, but it's also wild
| to me that they similarly don't bet big here and keep their ad
| infrastructure.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homomorphic_encryption
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32987155
| Terretta wrote:
| If it the concept that counts, not just that particular tech,
| some do "race" to get big data without compromising privacy,
| even when they don't have to (because no competitors are racing
| on the privacy dimension).
|
| For a survey, check out what firms are doing on "differential
| privacy" not just "homomorphic encryption". As a for instance,
| Apple -- since the OP is about them -- spent significant extra
| effort to make Maps anonymized.
|
| Concept:
| https://www.apple.com/privacy/docs/Differential_Privacy_Over...
|
| In Apple Maps: https://www.idownloadblog.com/2019/03/13/apple-
| maps-navigati...
| myaccount9786 wrote:
| Apart from the fact that they have no incentive to, there are
| technical downsides, even assuming you could get a useful
| homomorphic scheme to work in practice.
|
| For example, encrypted data can't be compressed. Columnar big
| data systems rely heavily on that to be performant.
| godelski wrote:
| > Apart from the fact that they have no incentive to
|
| They have huge incentives. Apple is positioning themselves as
| the privacy king. Meta has suffered huge losses because of
| their privacy abuses. Neither of these suggest no incentives.
| I'd argue that they suggest large incentives.
|
| The technical downsides are a fair critique though. But this
| also is where competition excels. Our machines are getting
| faster. Other algorithms have also gotten extremely faster
| and it would be naive to assume that homormorphic algorithms
| similarly don't. This is why I say an arms race.
| rocketbop wrote:
| I wonder if there's new feature or improvement Apple could
| introduce that would actually increase their sales. It
| seems like at the moment people buy the new iPhone because
| 1/ they need/want a new phone, 2/ they want an iPhone, and
| 3/ they want the new iPhone.
|
| Apple know what they need to do to be successful, and
| that's continue to release updates to the iPhone that in a
| few small ways make it slightly better than the previous
| one.
| wongarsu wrote:
| Not to mention being able to keep processing data, while
| your competition gets squeezed by tightening regulations
| around the world.
| godelski wrote:
| The other thing is you could likely squeeze your
| competition out of the market. Countries are waking up to
| the implications of data harvesting and that it isn't
| only being used by themselves but their adversaries. So
| if a big company, like Apple, got it working, it would be
| much easier to lobby legislation that would harm (or
| kill) your competitors. (While I think we would all be
| better off if this happened, I do recognize that this
| same power can be abused and cause a significant
| disruption in the ecosystem. But I think it would also be
| extremely difficult to impossible to gain such an edge
| that others couldn't quickly adapt. Even if they drag
| their feet)
| YetAnotherNick wrote:
| > They have huge incentives. Apple is positioning
| themselves as the privacy king
|
| I am willing to bet that it is a deal breaker only for very
| small minority of users. I would argue that search engine
| data is of much bigger privacy concern than OS, as compared
| to search history no OS action comes close in disclosing
| personal action, and google/bing almost has universal
| market presence even for Apple users.
|
| > Meta has suffered huge losses because of their privacy
| abuses.
|
| They had their revenue reduced, true. But it is not loss.
| They wouldn't be in any better position if they didn't used
| extra data when it was available.
| AndriyKunitsyn wrote:
| Apple has done plenty of major screwups that each put a big
| doubt on whether "Apple loves your privacy" is something
| more than PR BS, but for some reason, they all got
| memoryholed.
|
| An iphone user is _probably_ tracked by less ad agencies
| than a stock android user, but that's it.
| NBJack wrote:
| Ads targeting is actually a huge motivation for ads platforms,
| IIRC; customers buying ads want to know if they work.
| intelVISA wrote:
| Main reason QUIC was created iirc.
| godelski wrote:
| Ad targeting is much broader than that though. Even with
| encrypted data you can match keys to profiles. You just don't
| know who that profile belongs to and you don't even need to
| know the contents of that profile. The whole point here is
| that you can treat the system like a black box but still work
| with it in a useful way.
| NayamAmarshe wrote:
| Brave has proven that targeting is not always the best
| answer. They did an analysis on their own platform, their CTR
| is very very good and they do not compromise privacy in any
| way and still deliver ads (opt-in).
| smoldesu wrote:
| > They did an analysis on their own platform
|
| That's always how good studies start.
| 8note wrote:
| I assume brave shows mostly crypto adds? If so, the
| targeting is baked in
| eyakubovich wrote:
| It's unclear when homomorphic encryption will be ready for
| prime time, especially at big tech scale. It's easier to give
| up the data under assurances of how exactly that data will be
| used. Secure enclaves (e.g. AWS nitro enclaves) can be used to
| offer cryptographic attestations as to what the code is doing
| with the user data. Practically speaking, an average user won't
| inspect the code, of course. But it does allow for other
| companies to audit and vouch for the usage.
| fragmede wrote:
| as the a fan of homomorphic encryption I very much hear what
| you are saying (two examples I thought up
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32993163). But at the end
| of the day, there's no way to prove that Bob's Homomorphic
| Encryption SaaS company isn't "backing up" all your data into a
| regular database as well. And that's assuming Bob never gets
| hacked, too.
|
| At the end of the day, even with HE, we have to trust Bob to be
| trustworthy, and to have designed and implemented it totally
| correctly (or else data will leak in the clear).
|
| If it was Bob's small company then having a 3rd-party external
| auditor review the system would go a long way to gaining the
| public's trust, but unfortunately Meta has no such luxury. They
| could say they can't see your data until they were blue in the
| face, and they could even be telling the trust, but people
| don't _currently_ believe they haven 't sold your data (or the
| specific nuance there), so I'm not surprised they haven't made
| a large investment in HE. HE is also not quite there yet. It's
| ridiculously slow for anything but the most simple operations
| and Meta's data needs are far from simple.
| godelski wrote:
| Yeah you make a really good point (especially with those two
| examples, which the latter might not even require data
| collection at all). But I do think that an arms race in this
| direction would change the public view. You'd sure have a lot
| fewer nerds like us arguing about privacy. Though we'd
| probably be arguing more for open source to lessen the trust
| issue.
|
| I don't think we'll ever have fully trust-less systems. But I
| do think there's a big difference between saying "trust us,
| we don't look at the data" vs "we encrypted the data and use
| this method, trust us that we aren't decrypting it". The
| former method is worse because there's a lot of people that
| have clear access to the data. The latter is better because
| there are more speed bumps and the argument is more sound. A
| lot of trust is built from demonstrating good faith efforts.
| resfirestar wrote:
| This is about a request used to report a click in the app store,
| which is technically specified in the privacy policy [1] and you
| can get a CSV of it from Apple in data requests. This is the
| subject of a class action filed earlier this month [2].
|
| While I think Apple's data collection within its apps is
| excessive, the only thing the researchers achieve by conflating
| it with device analytics is giving tech media an "Apple Lies!"
| headline cycle. People should be informed about how these
| analytics/surveillance systems work and how to effectively
| navigate and counter them, not be sold paranoia and the idea that
| the settings are always lying. They're misleading you with
| marketing, sure, but the truth in this case is written plainly in
| the prompt that pops up the first time you open the app store.
|
| [1] https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/data/en/app-store/, "We
| use information about your browsing, purchases, searches, and
| downloads. These records are stored with IP address, a random
| unique identifier (where that arises), and Apple ID"
|
| [2] https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/apple-hit-with-
| clas...
| [deleted]
| fassssst wrote:
| Would people feel differently if we were talking about web
| apps, where nearly every click is sent to a server? Why is it
| egregious for a store to do analytics?
| resfirestar wrote:
| For one, because as another comment mentioned Apple's app
| store is the only option on iOS, so you can't opt out of it
| even if you really wanted to. I also find what Apple is doing
| particularly bad because the click data is associated with
| your account for a period of time decided by Apple (Edit: I
| said "permanently" before but that was wrong, it does expire
| but the privacy policy doesn't specify the exact retention
| period) and can't be deleted short of terminating the
| account. Compare how Google lets you disable or delete that
| kind of granular data from your account with the "Web and App
| Activity" switch.
| askafriend wrote:
| 1. "App Store browsing activity includes information like
| the content and apps you tap and view while browsing the
| App Store. This information is aggregated across users so
| that it does not identify you. We may also use local, on-
| device processing to select which ad to display, using
| information stored on your device, such as the apps you
| frequently open."
|
| 2. "To protect your privacy, targeted ads are delivered
| only if more than 5,000 people meet the targeting criteria.
| The information used to determine which ads are relevant to
| you is tied to random identifiers and not tied to your
| Apple ID."
|
| 3. "Apple's advertising platform receives information about
| the ads you tap and view against a random identifier not
| tied to your Apple ID."
|
| 4. It's also possible to reset this random, unique
| identifier or turn off personalization entirely.
|
| Source: https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/data/en/app-
| store/
| resfirestar wrote:
| I think that section is about how the advertising system
| uses browsing activity, not how it's collected and
| stored. Even with ad personalization turned off on my
| iPad, my data export has click records going back to 2020
| (when I created this Apple ID).
| shkkmo wrote:
| > While I think Apple's data collection within its apps is
| excessive, the only thing the researchers achieve by conflating
| it with device analytics
|
| The app store is the only way to install software... trying to
| pass it off as just another App with a separate policy seems
| disingenuous at best.
| pbhjpbhj wrote:
| >not be sold paranoia and the idea that the settings are always
| lying //
|
| Yeah, um, so if Apple et al. cared like you seem to, perhaps
| enough to stop lying, then that might be a first step towards
| people trusting them? You expect the weaker party to trust
| first before the stronger party even proves they're
| trustworthy!?
|
| >They're misleading you with marketing, sure [...] //
|
| They have no obligation to mislead. You want us to treat liars
| like they're angels.
| resfirestar wrote:
| I don't think it's about trust. The easy availability of
| short-form privacy policies and data export requests are the
| result of legal requirements, ideally you should be able to
| rely on those disclosures even if you don't know enough about
| the company to trust or distrust it. In this case, the
| disclosures correctly showed that this kind of click data was
| being collected.
| shkkmo wrote:
| Why was the title changed away from the article headline? Few
| people know what a DSID is before reading the article so this
| seems designed to deliberately bury the lead.
| oneplane wrote:
| I wouldn't be surprised if regardless of the methods users it
| can't truly be anonymous since that defeats the purpose. Even
| just compliance would result in resolvable data since you need to
| be able to request a copy of the data.
| boplicity wrote:
| Apple is fundamentally transforming into an advertising company.
| The difference between them and ad companies such as Google is
| that, with Apple, advertising is baked into almost every single
| product.
|
| Every time you open the App store, you're opening a giant garden
| of advertisements. These ads are extremely lucrative to Apple.
| Every time you update the OS, it prompts you with ads to sign up
| with more services. Every time you open Apple News, the same
| thing happens: you're bombarded with ads to sign up for a premium
| subscription. When I still had an Apple laptop, it would
| constantly give me a popup asking me to signup for iCloud, even
| though I hadn't consciously ever used it.
|
| At nearly every turn, engaging with Apple software leads to
| profitable ads for Apple. (Usually in the form of direct
| subscriptions, or commission based advertising.)
|
| What do ad companies love? User data! This is as true for Apple
| as it is for Google. The difference: Apple has an _iron grip_ on
| their advertisements like no other company in the world. This
| gives them the tools that let them _pretend_ they 're not an ad
| company. They are.
| snowwrestler wrote:
| You're really stretching here. Ad companies make their money by
| selling ads; compare how much of Apple's revenue comes from
| selling ads (very small %) vs how much of Google's revenue
| comes from selling ads (almost all of it).
|
| Prompts to buy additional products do not make a company an
| advertising company. If it did, every restaurant in the world
| would be an "advertising company" because wait staff, cashiers,
| and menus encourage customers to order additional food.
| rexf wrote:
| While Apple is not considered an advertising company today,
| they have been growing services revenue for the past several
| years. Part of that is growth in ads (3rd party ads in app
| store, 1st party ads in the OS, iAd [discontinued], etc).
|
| Even if rank and file Apple employees do not want to grow ads
| in iOS/App Store, clearly Apple leadership wants to sell more
| ads (and increase their services revenue). At App Store
| scale, their volume of ads is not trivial.
| gigel82 wrote:
| Curious if you'd say the same about Microsoft Windows. They
| never show banner ads anywhere in the product but they do
| advertise their own apps and services (and like the App Store
| on iPhone, they advertise apps you can install from their
| Microsoft Store).
|
| IMO, both Microsoft and Apple are showing me ads I don't want
| to be shown.
| boplicity wrote:
| The App Store is a list of ads, on which Apple earns a
| commission. I don't think it's a stretch to see it as an
| advertising platform.
|
| 1. Apple Displays ads (Sales content for products.)
|
| 2. Apple gets paid when those ads convert into sales.
|
| If Apple didn't get paid when Apps were sold through the app
| store, then I could see how it isn't an ad platform for them.
| Yet, the _only_ option, if you want to sell a product listed
| on the app store is to pay Apple their cut, which
| fundamentally turns it into a paid advertising platform
| controlled by Apple.
| threeseed wrote:
| You can distort the meaning of words and call it whatever
| you like.
|
| But it's a channel cost not an advertising one.
|
| Apple still gets their cut when an in-app purchase is made
| hence it's not tied to the App Store list.
| scyzoryk_xyz wrote:
| What was it lately about Apple now being valued at more than
| all the other SV giants _combined_? Insane.
|
| [edit: not true at all, apologies]
|
| Like countless others I've always been very sympathetic to the
| entire philosophy of the company - like how they've mostly kept
| to the high road in many important ways. It is going to be a
| huge shame when they go down that AD road.
|
| But on the bright side - it might turn out that Apple will just
| have to be the first/main for anti-monopoly regulation.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| > What was it lately about Apple now being valued at more
| than all the other SV giants combined?
|
| That it is not true.
|
| https://companiesmarketcap.com/
| nemothekid wrote:
| Maybe it's true if you only consider tech companies in the
| bay area (silicon valley)? Apple is 2.3T.
|
| GOOG (1.2T) + NVDA (.38T) + META (.29T) + ADBE (.14T) + CRM
| (.14T) + NFLX (.12T) = 2.27T
|
| Oracle makes or breaks this if you still want to consider
| them a Silicon Valley company (the headquarters was moved
| to Austin last year)
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| I assumed SV giants meant tech giants meant Apple,
| Microsoft, Alphabet, Amazon, and Meta.
| happyopossum wrote:
| Neither MS or Amazon are SV companies...
| [deleted]
| scyzoryk_xyz wrote:
| I assumed the same while writing the comment above.
|
| Perhaps the source I was remembering was also referring
| to SV companies, and I thought it meant the big ones
| above.
| smoldesu wrote:
| > It is going to be a huge shame when they go down that AD
| road.
|
| Bigger or smaller of a shame than the time they went down the
| surveillance road?
| [deleted]
| cbsmith wrote:
| > Apple is fundamentally transforming into an advertising
| company. The difference between them and ad companies such as
| Google is that, with Apple, advertising is baked into almost
| every single product.
|
| It's nice to think this is part of a transformation taking
| place at Apple. In truth, what is transforming is our
| perception of Apple. It's not like Analytics has recently
| changed how it operates.
| antipaul wrote:
| Everyone uses data they collect to "improve" their own
| offerings.
|
| But the others then make money by sharing/selling the data _to
| third parties_(incentive).
|
| Does Apple use this data only for internal use, or do they also
| share (sell) it to third parties? With or without privacy?
| deadmutex wrote:
| Who are the others you are referring to here? Can you be more
| specific? Because it matters in this case
| quonn wrote:
| So you think they need user data to display the ad for Apple
| Care+ and Apple TV? which they unconditionally display to
| anyone anyway? Those are the only two ads I have seen.
|
| Calling the app store an ad is really stretching the truth.
| It's a store, of course it displays the products that are for
| sale.
| judge2020 wrote:
| The App Store itself has ads[0], but some changes might be in
| preparation for deeper ad integrations[1].
|
| 0: https://searchads.apple.com/advanced
|
| 1: https://appleinsider.com/articles/22/11/14/apples-4b-ad-
| busi...
| askafriend wrote:
| > Every time you open the App store, you're opening a giant
| garden of advertisements.
|
| Curation and Ads are very different. When you walk into a
| Target and see a curated set of products like bath towels,
| they're not Ads. In fact, customers pay more to shop at Target
| because of Target's ability to curate quality products
| consistently.
|
| Now the App Store _does_ have Ads (mainly in search - one slot
| at the top). But it 's far from a "giant garden every time you
| open it".
| _aavaa_ wrote:
| Idk about your region, but the App Store in my region
| features actual advertisements on the front page.
|
| The first showcase is an actual showcase, but the second item
| is very much ads. And the way it's set up is to have
| something like 1/2 the image visible without the user
| scrolling, but the part that says is that it's an ad is not
| visible without scrolling. So the idea I guess is to have the
| user click on it to find out more based on 1/2 the image
| without them knowing that it was an ad.
| eikenberry wrote:
| Does Apple charge for the curation?
| situationista wrote:
| Arguably yes, since that curation is paid for with the cut
| Apple takes on sales in the Apple store.
| Cenk wrote:
| No
| smoldesu wrote:
| They charge you $99/year to qualify, so yes.
| dewey wrote:
| Did you follow the latest changes where they slapped casino
| and gambling ads everywhere?
| https://www.macrumors.com/2022/10/26/app-store-gambling-
| ads-...
| firefoxkekw wrote:
| It wasn't true even without the unique identifier, Apple can
| always correlated all the other data they sent to their servers
| to identified you.
|
| Most people thing of anonymity like a boolean when is most like a
| gradient, for example, Tor not only needs onion routing, it also
| need to to present each user to the net alike, that is why they
| configure their version of firefox in a specific way and even a
| simple thing like changing the resolution of the window make you
| less anonymous. Even in perfect conditions you still vulnerable
| to correlation attacks and if you are the US, you can probably
| just use network flow data to deanonymize an user, obviously to
| do it the resources and implications would be enormous.
|
| In the end is just a gradient of being anonymous to who? The ad
| conglomerate? A big state?
|
| It would be literally impossible with a standard iphone to be
| anonymous to Apple, is just PR by Apple.
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| I wish i could filter {url} out of my HN rankings, for url in {
| Gizmodo, ... }.
| smoldesu wrote:
| I agree, the Bloomberg article is much more thorough:
| https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/apple-hit-with-clas...
| therealmarv wrote:
| Why the ... I need to buy a pixel and install a niche operating
| system like GrapheneOS or CalyxOS to be at least a little safe
| with my privacy :/
|
| btw. GrapheneOS is great!
| nayuki wrote:
| [2022-11-15] Louis Rossman - "Apple SUED for privacy violations;
| iOS collects invasive analytics even if you opt out." -
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=016QGxOsjQY [11 min]
| kornhole wrote:
| When people realize they have been lied to, they will break up
| with a lover unless they are trapped in an abusive relationship.
| system2 wrote:
| There is no better alternative unfortunately.
| lern_too_spel wrote:
| Even on Google-flavored Android devices, you don't have to
| use the Play Store if you don't want to. You don't have to
| use Google Maps if you don't want to. You don't have to send
| your location to Google if you don't want to. iOS is strictly
| worse than all the other alternatives I know of.
| fsflover wrote:
| It depends on what is "better" for you. I'm happy with my
| Pinephone and waiting for my preordered Librem 5.
| reaperducer wrote:
| Unless the only option when you break up with your high class
| lover is to go back to the herpes-infected skag in the alley
| behind CGBG's.
|
| I'll go rotary before I go Android.
| mymacbook wrote:
| Rotary? Otherwise loved this.
| valleyer wrote:
| Refers to this:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotary_dial
| mathstuf wrote:
| That does exist:
| https://skysedge.com/unsmartphones/RUSP/index.html
| superkuh wrote:
| It's entirely possible to use a computer for computing and a
| phone for voice/text. There's no need for combining them into
| one device with the worst aspects of them all.
| falcolas wrote:
| While technically correct, this point of view is about a
| decade behind reality. Mobile devices are the de-facto
| computation device for most people. Fewer and fewer people
| have dedicated computation devices; there's no need for
| them if you have a smartphone.
|
| It does mean being beholden to one of two smartphone OS
| makers unless you're in the technically capable 5%.
| postalrat wrote:
| No mouse or keyboard? No thanks.
| MichaelCollins wrote:
| That's a choice they make, not some sort of immutable
| "reality".
| falcolas wrote:
| To use a smartphone, arguably. It's now how it's shaping
| out though. The power of chat apps (telegram, whatsapp,
| etc) alone makes it hard to be part of a social circle
| without one.
|
| Peer pressure's an incredibly strong force, as is the
| stigma of being an outsider.
| bellinom wrote:
| CalyxOS and GrapheneOS are really great alternatives to
| stock/OEM Android. A lot more apps than rotary too.
| dang wrote:
| Related:
|
| _Proposed class action alleges that Apple tracks users despite
| privacy assurances_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33593455 - Nov 2022 (191
| comments)
|
| _App Store on iOS 14.6 sends every tap you make in the app to
| Apple_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33520775 - Nov 2022
| (190 comments)
| [deleted]
| Mattish wrote:
| I'm not one to jump infront of a bus for the big company, but the
| "testing" being reported on here is so incredibly lacking.
|
| - Single proof via a single device on a single OS version from a
| single API response.
|
| - Claim on the latest version it is doing the same, but can't
| prove it. Just that requests are being sent when you interact
| with the application(ok?)
|
| ...And that's it.
|
| I don't know the state of the jailbreaking scene, but a quick
| search seems to indicate that throughout 14.X and 15.X could have
| been checked, but they haven't. Would happily take this more
| seriously when reporting of issues is more sufficent. (or others
| proving more proof)
| tsuujin wrote:
| This is totally unrelated to the content of the article, but is
| anyone else sick to death of mobile site design on these kind of
| websites?
|
| Trying to read the article and as I scroll down, a full third of
| my screen gets occupied by a video locked to the top of the
| screen, and every other paragraph is an ad that takes up the rest
| of the screen, plus any banners they choose to take up the bottom
| sixth of the screen.
|
| It's so distracting that I can't focus on the actual article;
| reader view becomes mandatory. This is the pattern on so many
| sites now and it's infuriating.
| [deleted]
| pvg wrote:
| _is anyone else sick to death_
|
| Statistically everybody is which is why it's a topic boring
| enough to be avoided - from
| https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
|
| _Please don 't complain about tangential annoyances--e.g.
| article or website formats, name collisions, or back-button
| breakage. They're too common to be interesting._
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-11-21 23:01 UTC)