Comment by Lammy
4 years ago
Maybe it's just me but the idea that my computer lets Apple (+ any LE organizations) surveil my app launches seems so much scarier than any malware.
4 years ago
Maybe it's just me but the idea that my computer lets Apple (+ any LE organizations) surveil my app launches seems so much scarier than any malware.
If you haven't downloaded your data from Apple recently I suggest doing that. The amount of personal info they collect has exploded over the last couple years.
Their Services business is moving them into Google levels of data collection.
> The amount of personal info they collect has exploded over the last couple years.
Since maybe 2016-ish? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FBI–Apple_encryption_dispute
For anyone who wants to do this, you can do it here (at least if you are in the EU): http://privacy.apple.com/
Having downloaded my data from both Apple and Google, "Google levels of data collection" seems inaccurate.
Is this the one-time signature checking that has been in place since Catalina, or is this something else? (And if so is there any information about it?)
I experienced the issue with Mojave while this was happening. So not just Catalina.
Ok, but this doesn't answer the question. If this is the same behavior since Mojave, why aren't those users complaining about this outage on their Mojave and Catalina based system?
Presumably something changed, but so far I haven't heard an explanation that makes sense of it.
2 replies →
Why is it scary that your computer checks for malware?
It’s not like Apple us building a database of apps you’ve launched linked to your address and social security number.
> Why is it scary that your computer checks for malware?
It isn't just checking for malware, its broadcasting your app opening behavior to apple and anyone else who might be listening.
> It’s not like Apple us building a database of apps you’ve launched linked to your address and social security number.
You know this how? Seriously, I don't get why you would believe that.
Because Apple would not benefit from doing so, I’m fact could be hugely damaged doing so.
They don’t have any significant advertising business. They don’t need to collect any personally identifiable information. They’ve promoted their brand by putting their customers privacy first.
So why would you believe they would intentionally risk all of that here?
7 replies →
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or serious. Schrodinger's sarcasm.
Poe's law.
Well it would be pretty good information to have to do analysis against.
You could easily see knowing how often an app is used on an OS to be useful business information if apple wanted to create software to get into a trend before it gets to big.
Of course that doesn't require fine grained time data just daily would be more than good enough.
However you could also see the business use of knowing if two pieces of software are often used together or sequentialy which could inform creating an all in one/integrated experience that would do well in a market. So you need that finer application timing.
Of course that doesn't require tying it to a particular user account,not even a device ID, just a sessionID that changes each time the device restarts would probably be granular enough.
However since we've got that other stuff in place per device wouldn't it be great to see if there's a correlation between people using an app on there Mac and using it or another App on there iphone, ipad, or watch. What piece of data can we include to match up a user across all their devices? Maybe some kind of obfuscated or derived userID.
Of course you'd hope that other interests such as a commitment to privacy would rule out the use of such a dataset. If Apple did have such a dataset then you'd hope they'd be doing whatever processes (social, business, and technical) it can to obfuscate and seperate how that dataset is tied to a specific user.
The only real argument against Apple not having it is the balance between the cost of creating/exploiting such a data set, the expected profit, and the legal and reputational costs of such behaviour.
I don't know they're not doing that, is the problem. They probably aren't, but as Bill Kristol offered recently, 99% sure isn't 100% sure, and the fact that I'm not 100% sure is a problem unto itself.
It's only a matter of time and money: https://www.google.com/amp/s/mashable.com/article/apple-sear...
It’s not like Apple us building a database of apps you’ve launched linked to your address and social security number.
Linked to your identity if you have a credit card saved for say iTunes.
Any proof of that audacious claim?
9 replies →
Has anyone confirmed if this outside the error-reporting agreement step?
This has happened since forever on Mac, Windows and Ubuntu.
Can you please provide resources for Ubuntu?
I would guess they are referencing the Ubuntu Amazon search thing from about 5 years ago (IIRC)
2 replies →
Sorry, not on Ubuntu. It's easy to check, compile a binary, run it, and use wireshark to watch your uplink.
Ubuntu did upload what applications you launched to Amazon.
6 replies →
No it has not.
I'm fairly sure Windows does upload at least some hashes if you have it enabled in Windows Defender (which it is by default). Don't expect Ubuntu does this though.
2 replies →
I don't know about you, but hashes of the binaries I run don't exactly reveal any sensitive personal information about me. That said, obviously they should have much more graceful degradation in place for when something is wrong with the service.
The information reveals in exquisite detail what times of day I'm working, what times I'm slacking off, which days I work too.
And whether I'm taking a long or short lunch break, or lots of breaks. Whether I stay in bed until late, or work late at night. It's enough to predict whether I'm a "good" worker.
It also reveals whenever I travel, which coffee shops and libraries I frequent and what times of day. It also reveals what time I open any of several video conferencing apps.
And the sort of thing some HR would like to browse when assessing job candidates. They wouldn't need to ask "do you know X", they could just consult the Apple log of how often I run the relevant commands. Things like "we see you ran 'git' an average of 145 times per day last month, tell us more about that".
And whether I'm running tools I "shouldn't".
All that seems quite sensitive and personal to me.
> It's enough to predict whether I'm a "good" worker.
If your employer is willing to be that invasive, they already have a much easier route for getting that information: forcibly installing surveillance software on your work machine.
> It also reveals whenever I travel, which coffee shops and libraries I frequent and what times of day.
How...? How would the binaries you're running have anything remotely relevant to say about this?
> They wouldn't need to ask "do you know X", they could just consult the Apple log of how often I run the relevant commands. Things like "we see you ran 'git' an average of 145 times per day last month, tell us more about that".
That's a pretty contrived use-case for a pretty significant and unscrupulous bit of data-sharing. From a PR perspective Apple would never intentionally and publicly share this data. So assuming this data is even stored anywhere after the check is complete, and assuming any personal identification is kept with it, both of which are huge ifs, that leaves a couple of possibilities:
- Hackers gain access to the data
- Government subpoenas the data
- Extremely lucrative contracts, probably from advertising companies, are enough to motivate Apple to sell the data despite the risk of a massive PR scandal
I don't see any of those falling under your proposed scenario of random employers casually perusing the logs.
3 replies →
"Hey Siri, select every Tor Browser user in America for additional screening."
Ironically, if tor was already running, the check would run over tor and not be traceable. But to start it in the first place it would be traceable. Damn.
1 reply →
That's scary. What if you set it up inside a Virtual Machine?
In this case, isn't the hash of the binary consistent across all devices, so Apples can in fact derive exactly which binary you're running (assuming they have a large database of application binary and hashes)?
> assuming they have a large database of application binary and hashes
A database like an "app store"?
1 reply →
yup! and the variety of ways to leak that information along the way...Privacy(tm)!
Yes. My personal data involves what I do within those apps, not which ones they are.
19 replies →
I run Tor browser occasionally. That fact alone is sensitive personal information about me. It makes me stand out. Someday it might be held against me.
I already expect the ISP to detect my Tor traffic.
But I didn't expect Apple, of all companies, to have a detailed audit trail of every time I've ever opened it, to the nearest minute.
Don’t forget that client IP geolocation gives coarse location, so they have your timestamped track log, too.
Big Sur prevents Little Snitch from blocking these system level connections, and these OS apps will also bypass any configured VPN.
What about the hash of a password cracking binary or the hash of some sort of binary used for piracy or stripping DRM off of something? Or just in general the ability to profile users based on the apps they use seems completely trivial. I imagine it would not take a particularly brilliant data scientist to correlate people who use FTP programs or developer programs or whatever else with people who buy high value items from certain e-commerce sites, for example. Seems like a marketer’s dream if they could ever get access to that. And sure Apple wouldn’t do that, today, on purpose, but are you 100% certain that could never happen? And if there was some way to tie that illegal piracy app binary hash to you personally and the government came knocking with a subpoena, seems like something Apple might be forced to comply with. It’s a very slippery slope.
> I don't know about you, but hashes of the binaries I run don't exactly reveal any sensitive personal information about me.
If they know the hash of (let's say) a pr0n app which you run, then I'd say that's pretty damn sensitive information Apple is getting.
It reveals how often I am running new software, it reveals what time of day I run new software, it reveals what networks I connect from
I think that for some users, the applications they run and the frequency they run them at would be enough to identify them across time and accounts. I could change my identifier, even my name, but at the end of the day, I've been using the same apps for at least a decade more or less.